January 13, 2006

"She says she definitely is not running. I'd love to see her run, she's terrific."

Ooh! Laura Bush said that about Condoleezza Rice. So, then, Condi's running! Right?

IN THE COMMENTS: A pseudonymous Condi hater makes a racist slur, and after I delete it, makes it again, in the middle of the night, so that I don't see it to delete it for a few hours. When I do delete it, I write:
I suspect Democrats who fear the strength of a Rice Presidency have a stake in making Republicans fear that racism will sink her. Who are these people who are willing to slink about and type racist slurs in the hope that conservatives will stay in touch with racist feelings some moronic liberals assume surely lurk in their hearts? Or is it just a relief to finally find a way to express their own racism? Be careful, Condi opponents, we will be closely monitoring your racism. Though possibly not in the middle of the night!

I note the possibility that the commenter in question is not a Condi hater but is only posing as one to make people who actually oppose her look bad.

153 comments:

Meade said...

I think Laura Bush is terrific!

Henry said...

If Condi is president, can she keep Laura Bush as first lady?

RogerA said...

I dont know if Dr. Rice is running--I tend to take people at their word--but if she is, I think she would be terrific.

limeshurbet said...

If she doesn't run I hope she is drafted by the delegates to the convention in 2008

Eli Blake said...

She won't win if she does run. The Bush administration has failed to address a continually deteriorating healthcare system, exploding deficits, and still hasn't figured out how to get us out of Iraq.

Condi would be considered a continuation of what we have now, and people won't vote for it.

Pogo said...

Re: "The Bush administration has failed to address a continually deteriorating healthcare system, exploding deficits, and still hasn't figured out how to get us out of Iraq."

In contrast, the Democrats have this great plan for nationalized health care (run by the same people that brought you the humane Alito hearings!), exploding deficits, and no plan for Iraq than 'cut-and-run'.

Whatta platform!

Fitz-Hume said...

Wasn't Harriet Meyers nominated on the strength of Laura's recommendation? That turned out real well.

RogerA said...

Eli--Excuse me--what might a Dr Rice run for president have to do with the Bush Administration's position--do you honestly believe that the American voter really cares about "the issues?"

hmmm, tooth fairy, easter bunny, santa claus--

e said...

Ann's fairly independent so I'm sure she doesn't get the weekly memo from Rove. But all this was decided ages ago. George and Dick, at the early stages, will keep silent, leaving it to Laura and Lynn to do the wink winking and nudge nudging. Eventually leading to endorsements and campaigning in Iowa by them and others. Ahhh the power of the First Lady's bully pulpit. Mehlman is continuing his work reaching out to African-Americans. Steele is running in Maryland for Senator. Swann for Governor in Pennsylvania. The slightest shift in the African American vote in these and other must need states for the Democrats, like Michigan and Wisconsin, spell absolutely defeat for the Dems.Thanks to Alito and the tactics Kennedy took in his questioning the Italian Catholic vote on the Eastern seaboard is also prime for the splitting. Condi is the dramatic and final nail in the Dem's coffin. The best part of all this, is that the South will pull for Condi in a big way. The Dems won't know what hit them, and the fact that they consider the Republican party rabid racists and women-haters just gives the Republicans more time and space to spring the trap. Some Dems get it though. Know what's up. Donna Brazille for one. As for the rest of them, just note the tone at the slightest talk about Condi. How scared they are.

Wade_Garrett said...

I'm a Democrat, but I'd like to see Condi run; she is very impressive personally, and I'd like to see her run on her own. Having said that, I think a Rice candidacy would make a lot of people in the Republican party unhappy -- this is the same party who counts the Bob Jones University types as an important part of their base.

I'd say its unlikely that a bachelor could be elected President. Could 40-something single woman?

David said...

I often wonder if Judge Meyers was a 'throw-down' to make the knee jerk democrats turn their back on a woman. This would be an ideal set-up for Dr. Rice.

The Russians are nervous and already disparaging her.

I would vote for Dr. Rice in a heartbeat!

As for the black vote, the Democrats have been studiously avoiding the fact that there is a strong middle class of blacks in this country.

Go Condi!

Simon said...

Per comments here and here, I am not opposed, but I have certain concerns. Contra Eli, though, I think Rice would not only win, but would eviscerate any conceivable Democratic opponent in 2008.

I'm of the opinion that she should run, but I say that without endorsement, or particular desire for her to win (I'd also like to see Newt Gingrich and Olympia Snowe run), if for no other reason because then we would find out what her positions on various issues are. I'm not opposed to her being the candidate any more than I'm in favor of it - my point is simply that we know so little about her that it seems absurd to be gung-ho for her. Rather, I think that the GOP is a big tent party, and I think a genuinely diverse group of primary candidates would be a healthy undertaking for the party.

XWL said...

A trial balloon?

Probably not.

A nudge in the right direction?

Possibly, maybe Pres. Bush sees a possible Pres. Rice as an amazing legacy he could leave an even more lasting imprint on U.S. and World Politics than he has already (and besides, she's the right person for the job, and the times)

Aspasia M. said...

My two-bit prediction - Huckabee from AR.

Elizabeth said...

I'd say its unlikely that a bachelor could be elected President. Could 40-something single woman?

What a great question. Are the implications of being unmarried different for men and women? How does the adjunct of family function for men and women in the political sphere? It's possible that a woman without a husband and/or kids can be seen as more in charge, more steely, and that could be good for her.

I can't say I'd vote for her, but I'd be pleased to see her run.

Elizabeth said...

If Newt runs, I want a full investigation into all his extra-marital blowjobs first. National security could be at stake.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Cheney's ticker might make an excellent excuse for her to slip into the Veep slot. Then she's really anointed as the party favorite.

I know Dick and Lynne want to go fishing and spend lots of time with the grandchildren.

neuroconservative said...

Analyzing the First Lady's rare public statements on controversial issues over the last five years, I would say that they are often well-coordinated trial balloons.

I take this as a sign Condi is looking to run, and that Bush & Rove would be very interested in that possibility. Bear in mind that their early horse, Frist, stumbled out of the gate and they need to get a candidate prepped by this summer.

Etain Peregrine said...

If Condi decides she wants to be President, she will be. What a position to be in. Hope she takes the chance.

gregHH said...

Don't forget GOPers had high hopes for Lizzie Dole too, but she petered out because she had nothing to say besides, "I'm a woman"
Dr Rice would have a great start and eveyone would want to hear what she had to say, but then she'd better say something interesting.

Jabba the Tutt said...

Terrence: "I think a Rice candidacy would make a lot of people in the Republican party unhappy -- this is the same party who counts the Bob Jones University types as an important part of their base."

Yeah, those Christian conservatives are just a bunch of racists; poor, ignorant and easy to lead.

Jamie said...

Puts me in mind of an old Bloom County (I think I also made this comment when Dr. Rice became SecState), in which Binkley's dad, a committed liberal, had to Call A Friend (Oliver's dad) for reassurance that he wasn't evil for not liking Jesse Jackson. Oliver's dad takes him by the shoulders and tells him, "The first black President will be a conservative." Could it be... maybe... that the first African-American President AND the first woman President will be a conservative? Or (even better, by my lights) a neocon?

Elizabeth: indeed yes, given that the Chief Executive has almost been reliant on a First Lady (though sometimes a daughter, right?) to attend to social details, and it'd be hopelessly emasculating even for the most liberal man, I think, to take on the role of picking out the White House china (not trying to be sexist here, just looking at reality as it's manifested itself to me), might it not be easier for a single woman to be elected than a married woman? A single woman could have a personal assistant do all the public First Lady stuff without cost to either her own image or a spouse's. Plus, even though Dr. Rice obviously has a goodly portion of gravitas, she's sufficiently "feminine" that the inevitable homophobic smears might not be so sticky.

I think it's a pipe dream, but you never know.

Jeremy said...

I would imagine a segment of the Republican party would be unhappy; it would have nothing to do with racism, but everything to do with her stance on abortion.

Tony said...

If Condi is president, can she keep Laura Bush as first lady?

Only if they move to Canada and George marries Condi also.

Then she'd also have an ex-president as "first mate".

Shoot... If they did that they'd all have to become Democrats!

Uriah said...

"is running" and "will be running" are two VERY different things. I'd be inclined to support her but that would depend on getting some more info on her positions on some social issues. There is no clear word on what positions she would take.

Elizabeth said...

Jabba, do you really mean to argue that Bob Jones U. isn't racist?

Patrick said...

The Bob Jones University web site (URL is www.bju.edu - snicker)states that there are 5000 students “from every state and 40 foreign countries.”

So, let’s say that 4000 of the students are voting American citizens. Let’s also say that they have at least one sibling each and two parents each. That makes 16,000 people. That’s not a very big “base” from which to pull.

Also note that the student featured on the web site's home page is black. At least they're trying to look as though it is not a racist institution.

Chris said...

Take this to the bank. Laura Bush didn't utter that sentence by accident. She knew the effect it would have within the Party. She also knew that it would give the junior Senator from the state of New York a serious case of the Ass.

Next up: the Chorus of the Lefty Moonbats blaming Condi for the assassination of Tupac and Biggie Smalls. They have to pry black voters away from her somehow.

Charlie Eklund said...

Bob Jones University types are an important part of the Republican base? A numerically tiny and functionally insignificant part of their base, maybe, but little more than that.

Terrence, you need to get out more. Maybe meet some actual Republicans. I think you'd be surprised.

Go Condi!

Robert said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Fenrisulven said...

"Having said that, I think a Rice candidacy would make a lot of people in the Republican party unhappy -- this is the same party who counts the Bob Jones University types as an important part of their base."

Oh please, thats like saying Byrd appeals to the KKK base of the Dem Party, or that Clinton/Kennedy appeal to Dem pervets who enjoy molesting interns.

I would crawl over broken glass to get Condi elected. Go play your race card somewhere else, like 1953...

Fenrisulven said...

"If Newt runs, I want a full investigation into all his extra-marital blowjobs first. National security could be at stake."

If they're subordinate employees, trading sex for jobs [see Clinton] then sure. If he's sexually harassing camapaign volunteers while Al Queda plots 9-11 [see Clinton] then sure. If he's sodomizing his interns [see Clinton], then sure.

Robert said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Robert said...

Fenfuckwhdever

That "Clinton" thing isn't going to wash forever. The ignorant masses will catch on eventually...to you peoples BS.

Fenrisulven said...

oh goober, you're just mad because when Clinton wagged his finger at you, you got down on your hands and knees and swallowed. "Fenfuckwhatever" is the best you could come up with? You're either a Moonbat or a drunk.

Clue: America is smarter than you. Thats why you loons are wandering the political wilderness these days. Enjoy.

Lastango said...

Condi won't get the nomination. Like Colin Powell, she's a blue suit liberal. She supports affirmative action, and called the Minutemen "vigilantes." That won't fly with the conservative base.

Eli Blake said...

Lastango:

I have to disagree with you on one thing: I am a Democrat and I see a huge difference between Rice and Powell. Rice is as responsible as anybody for the mess we have gotten ourselves into in Iraq. She along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and a few others, chose to start a war first, then put together whatever bits of information and excuses they could engineer into a justification. And I know I could never support anyone who pushed us into this mess.

Powell, on the other hand, disagreed with it internally. It is true that he supported his C-in-C publically (he is, after all a professional and a soldier), even going before the UN and presenting a fistfull of what we now know to be faulty information. However, I have blogged on that before, I think Powell believed it to be true at the time and regrets being used. I've always respected Colin Powell and respected what he says, even if I don't agree with it.

I would never vote for Rice. But although I'm a Democrat and a Liberal, I'd consider voting for Colin Powell.

miklos rosza said...

I'm surprised that goober snatcher's "buck-toothed coon" is being allowed to stand here on that blog. that might not be the "n-word," but it's close enough.

So get out of here.

rastajenk said...

Eli, you really think they rushed into war, and then tried to figure out a justification? Haven't you ever heard of a pincer movement in warfare? Well, look around, there's one going on right now.

Republicans have the long view, Dems and libs who claim to be independent can't get off the Saddam/9-11 non-connection, which is exceedingly short-sighted. Long-range planning can be a tougher sell sometimes, but it's the best way to plan for our security and that of our allies. That's why Dems will be on the outside looking around for quite a while to come.

Cousin said...

I vote based on who controls the deficit -- I had no idea this would make me a staunch Democrat.

knoxgirl said...

"the mess we have gotten ourselves into in Iraq"

Wow, I didn't know there were still people insisting Iraq is a failure.

knoxgirl said...

woops I forgot:

GO CONDI GO!!!!!

Charlie Eklund said...

I'm not surprised that goober_snatcher's racist comment has been allowed to remain. That remark, more than any of his other comments, tells us everything we need to know about him.

That he is a jerk, a racist and a buffoon we need no longer pay any attention to.

EddieP said...

Ann, please remove the disgusting racist comment, it has no place on this blog.

RogerA said...

Goober said: "...the bucktoothed coon..." You are one genuinely disgusting human being--

Ann Althouse said...

miklos rosza and others: I'm not here overseeing things at all hours. I've deleted it. You've quoted it, though, so it is still there. I suspect Democrats who fear the strength of a Rice Presidency have a stake in making Republicans fear that racism will sink her. Who are these people who are willing to slink about and type racist slurs in the hope that conservatives will stay in touch with racist feelings some moronic liberals assume surely lurk in their hearts. Or is it just a relief to finally find a way to express their own racism? Be careful, Condi opponents, we will be closely monitoring your racism. Though possibly not in the middle of the night!

By the way, I deleted the same slur earlier and he came back and reposted it.

J. Mark Thompson said...

I'm hoping Cheney will decide that for health reasons he will have to resign the Vice Presidency, this year or early next, and Bush will appoint Condi as his VP. And after serving in that position, she will decide to run after all.

Gerry said...

"I note the possibility that the commenter in question is not a Condi hater but is only posing as one to make people who actually oppose her look bad."

An admirable caution, and one I wish that people everywhere applied to all figures. There are Hillary bashers, and there are those who pretend to be one to make Hillary's opponents look bad. There are homophobes, and then there are those like Fred Phelps. And so forth.

If only the caveat is made for one side of the equation, it makes for an unbalanced playing field.

knoxgirl said...

Liberals, much more than conservatives, form opinions based on race. The bitterness of our current political climate reveals that those opinions are increasingly ugly and bigoted and racist.

I hope to god Condi runs, and wins, because it will take the sad, retro state of race politics in this country and turn it on its head. Hate speech will spew from the mouths of the "liberal" establishment and David Duke will vote Democrat. America will never be the same.

GO CONDI GO!

Blassingame said...

Fenwhatever,

Goober, though drunk, does raise that issue of the perils of continuing to evoke the pall that is Clinton – that of the analogies that may be drawn, say between Bushie and Nixon. Bush = Nixon, Bush = Nixon, Bush = Nixon…

monkeyfan said...

I love all this psychobabble about "The Conservative Base".

Someday, late at night, great flocks of moonbats are going to awaken trembling in their caves at the realization that America is the Conservative base.

All your base are belong to US.

Bruce Hayden said...

The left points at the Bob Jones contingent. But I think the reality is that her nomination would cause a meltdown in the Democratic party.

Their problem, as I see it, is that to some extent, part of their party identity is based on the assumption that they are more racially sensitive. That they are the party representing the downtroden in our society, and in particular, ethnic minorities. And they show this by pushing affirmative action.

But how close has a non-white person made it to the Democratic party nomination? Not very. Jesse Jackson was considered a joke, and Sharpton even more of one. Few, if any, took either of their candidacies seriously.

The Democrats aren't going to nominate a Black for the presidency because they view race in terms of affirmative action. And since there aren't that many Blacks in the country, their place is back on the plantation - though I will admit that Ron Brown did get his Commerce post based on his own merits (but he never could have run for president, given his corruption). No, the best place for an African-American in a Democratic administration is Surgeon General.

So, you have a Black woman, growing up in the segregated south, experiencing racial violence with the deaths of her friends, etc., rising to the top of the Republican party based entirely on her own merits.

This is a different paradigm. Yes, many of the less qualified minorities will still opt for advancement through affirmative action, and, therefore, the Democratic party. But plenty of the more competent will look to the Republican race blind philosophy kindly.

Let me also add that I don't see abortion disqualifying her, at least if she could get the nomination. If she does, or is on-track, I see the Democrats seeing no choice but nominating Hillary Clinton. And if they do, I see a lot of those (few IMHO) who would consider staying home on election day, not doing so in order to keep Mrs. Clinton from having another chance at stealing White House furnishings.

Also, though I think of Dr. Rice as primarily a Neocon, she can walk the walk and talk the talk when it comes to religion. Her father was a minister, and she has shown a devoutly religious side ever since - including being a church organist at most of the churches she has attended until joining the Bush (43) Administration (I doubt that she has the flexibility to do so now).

And I think that this confluence of the neocon and religious is important here. These are two very important groups in the Republican party, and bringing them together is hard. President Bush to some extent can be seen as such, but is more seen as religious, with Cheney and Rumsfeld the Administration's neocon side. My view is that Dr. Rice brings these two together much better than any almost any other politician on the national scene.

wv (2nd try): UMPDA - Cray computer UNICOS/mp Dump Analysis

Blassingame said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Blassingame said...

Ann Althouse: Who are these people who are willing to slink about and type racist slurs in the hope that conservatives will stay in touch with racist feelings some moronic liberals assume surely lurk in their hearts.

Might is not be that Republicans are afraid of a Rice candidacy precisely because they have thoroughly focus grouped the feelings of their own constituency and already know about the racist spirits that lurk in heart of the rural, mill worker, farmhand (yee-haw) and urban hand-gun aficionado, closeted bigot faction.

PatCA said...

As to the racism of conservatives, I'm sure there are some, as I'm sure there are some liberal racists as well. But I went to a conservative film festival couple of months ago (my first conservative event) and during one documentary (Emancipation, Revelation, Revolution)about black people and their history with the Republican Party, Condi appeared on screen. The whole crowd cheered; half the audience stood up and cheered!

Of course Laura's statement is one of the trial balloons. I think she's got it if she wants it.

As for being single, I think women might have more gravitas if their kids are grown, like Thatcher, rather than if they are married. They need to look like the aura of motherhood is behind them.

BTW who would be Condi's ideal escort? My vote is Jack Straw. Good for the alliance and all.

Blassingame said...

...conservative film festival...

huh?

azlibertarian said...

You heard it here first...

Rice/Rummy '08

Supercat said...

My future wife, Condi, will be an excellent president.

Kevin Murphy said...

If Condi runs, look for for Obama as the Dem's VP. But my best guess at this point is:

Guiliani-Rice v Hillary-Obama

Howard Beale said...

Can somebody please explain to me why everyone is so smitten with Condi? I'm looking for the brilliant mind that everyone's talking about and I'm not seeing it. Whenever she speaks, I hear a snotty know-it-all who's covering up her own insecurities by looking down her nose at her political opponents. If somebody out there is willing to educate me on the topic, I promise I'm open minded; I would love to have a president with the qualities that Condi is said to possess. I just don't see those qualities in her.

Condi is also vulnerable on a couple of key issues, one style, one substance. Her awkward physical appearance and stiff speaking style will hurt her in a national campaign. And her fingerprints were all over the deception that "allegedly" took place over WMDs. She was on the Sunday morning talk shows warning about mushroom clouds, and she played a big role in the "16 words" that made their way into the State of the Union Address. If the situation in Iraq hasn't improved significantly between now and 2008, the Dems will have an opportunity to reopen the question of how we got in there in the first place, and Condi will have some 'splainin' to do.

Blassingame said...

You heard it here first...

Rice/Rummy '08


Yes, and Santa/Jesus too.

knoxgirl said...

"...whenever she speaks, I hear a snotty know-it-all who's covering up her own insecurities by looking down her nose at her political opponents"

huh?

I think maybe that's the sound of your own insecurities you're hearing...

Steve White said...

Beale wants to know what we conservatives see in Condi.

Now Beale is correct in noting that Condi is a stiff speaker at times. If Condi is going to run, she's going to have to work on that.

Beale is incorrect in thinking that the kerfluffle over WMD will harm her, at least with conservatives. We conservatives had a half-dozen good reasons why Saddam had to go, and Condi knows all of them.

Now then, why would I, a white male conservative, support Condi for president (and she's my #1 pick right now):

1) She's smart. She has the intellectual horsepower to do the job.

2) She's street-smart. She's been around in life, done a number of jobs, and has a healthy perspective.

3) She's adaptable. Very important quality to have, since we don't know what challenges a president will face. Good thing we had GWB and not Al Gore on 9/12/01, as one example.

4) She has a spine. She'll stand tough and not allow polls to distract her, just like GWB and unlike most of the Dems mentioned for the job.

Notice that I haven't commented on specific positions she's taken on the issues of the day. I don't vote for a President based on issues, I vote based on character traits. That's why I couldn't vote for Al Gore (acknowledging that he's a smart fellow), and why I couldn't vote for John Kerry.

Condi versus Hillary? No contest: Condi has a spine, Hillary doesn't.

Ann Althouse said...

Beale: I had the same reaction to your perception that Rice is "snotty" that Knoxgirl did. It is a very common response to powerful women to see them as "arrogant" or "conceited" or something like that. Those words come readily to mind in judging women. I really do think men who use such words about strong women are having rather primal feelings, a physical urge toward male domination. I would recommend heightening your awareness of this reaction and overcoming it. Ah, there: did you just perceive me as arrogant?

Blassingame said...

"...whenever she speaks, I hear a snotty know-it-all who's covering up her own insecurities by looking down her nose at her political opponents"

huh?

I think maybe that's the sound of your own insecurities you're hearing...


No, I hear it too. The snottiness, I mean. Anyway…

Noam Chomsky/Ted Kooser ‘08

ChrisO said...

About Bob Jones: First of all, the reference was to Bob Jones "types," so statistics about the University itself are irrelevant. I find it amusing that so many commenters are pretending to be shocked that anyone would consider those types to be part of the base. And by the way, I didn't see them referred to as drooling racists by anyone but other Republicans on this board. The fact is that the Republican base is made up of a substantial number of what I would consider those types -- largely white, very socially conservative Christians. Of course that's not the whole base, but to deny that they're a part of the party, and a particularly activist part, is ridiculous. Let's all pretend the South Carolina primary didn't exist. Because if it didn't there's a good chance John McCain would be President now. And candidates in that very important primary regularly make the pilgrimage to Bob Jones. Why? Not because it has 5000 students and a black person on the cover of its catalog.

Let's not forget that a sitting President in time of war won re-election by the narrowest margin ever, and now enjoys near record low approval ratings, so I think it demonstrates more than a little hubris to declare that "America is the conservative base." Particularly since the Democrats in the Senate represent 55 percent of the population.

Rice may well be elected, but there are a lot of issues to consider. Despite the assertions that the South will overwhelmingly go for her, I'm still not sure that the Jesse Helms and Ray Moore voters see her as their ideal candidate. They probably wouldn't vote for a Democrat, so the issue would be will they vote for Rice of just stay home?

And by the way, black Republicans have run for office all over the country, opposed by Democrats. So the notion that Democrats would dissolve in a puddle of internally conflicted goo at the thought of running against Rice is just wishful thinking. Her support of Bush and her involvement in Iraq make her very easy to oppose, thank you very much.

And knoxgirl, "Wow, I didn't know there were still people insisting Iraq is a failure." Really? I think you need to get out a little more. Unless your idea of a success is a hopelessly divided country with a ravaged infrastructure. Oh, but I forgot. We went in there because of the rape rooms.

Daniel said...

Along the lines of several other posters, I've long predicted that Dick Cheney would resign for "health reasons" and be replaced by Condi Rice, thereby setting her up for a Presidential bid in 2008. I expect this to happen sometime in the first half of 2007, to give her time to get "experience" as VP and pre-empt other potential Republican candidates.

Condi would be a shoo-in for the Republican nomination and a heavy favorite to be elected in 2008. She'd peal away at least 25% of the black vote based on identity politics, and the Democrats can't afford to lose any black votes. She'd lose a few votes to racists and misogynists, but far fewer than conventional wisdom would predict, and those votes would be more than compensated for by guilty white voters anxious to prove they're not anti-black or anti-woman. In a head-to-head contest between her and Hillary, Condi wins easily.

It's also possible that Condi could replace Cheney in August or September of 2006, in time to effect the November elections. Imagine the impact of Bush nominating a black woman as VP! It would suck all of the oxygen out of whatever issues and attacks the Democrats are trying to gain traction on. Imagine the impact of Congressional confirmation hearings in the midst of campaign season! Some Democrats would try to Bork her, while others would walk on egg shells, and the moonbat base would go crazy. They'd be sure it was the supremely evil plot of Karl Rove.

Cheney has had several recent hospital visits, and he can pick any time he likes to announce that his health precludes him from continuing as VP.

Fenrisulven said...

"Republicans...have thoroughly focus grouped the feelings of their own constituency and already know about the racist spirits that lurk in heart of the rural, mill worker, farmhand (yee-haw) and urban hand-gun aficionado, closeted bigot faction."

You're confusing the hyperbole & smears of the Left with reality. And you're invoking bigoted stereotypes [LOL, gotta love that] about the Heartland, the South, and gun owners. We've come to expect that from the Party that boasts about its "tolerance" [snicker].

You want to talk about a racist consituency, ask a Dem strategist why Joe Lieberman failed to get the nomination...

Or just ask Micheal Steele, the Lt Gov[R] who was pelted by Oreo's by your "constituency".

Dems are afraid of a Rice presidency b/c they want to keep blacks on their plantation - to exploit them for votes. If even 15% peel off to the Right, the Dems will never again win a national election.

Thats why Condi will be smeared by the Left, and likely explains her reluctance to run. No one should be put through that. But you guys will try, just like with Alito. Pathetic.

Howard Beale said...

I think maybe that's the sound of your own insecurities you're hearing...

If I'm so insecure, what am I doing posting comments on this blog? I'm truly interested in what the big deal is with Condi. You seem pretty certain, perhaps you can tell me.

Blassingame said...

Chriso, this is all just more hemming and hawing. The Demographics don't lie. A large percentage of Republican support comes from Archie Bunker style, Bible thumping, hypocrite, ignoramus bigots. The only question is whether they can be further duped into forgoing their natural prejudges and vote for a black woman. I’m betting not.

Fenrisulven said...

"A large percentage of Republican support comes from Archie Bunker style, Bible thumping, hypocrite, ignoramus bigots. The only question is whether they can be further duped into forgoing their natural prejudges and vote for a black woman."

LOL. More bigoted stereotypes from the "Party of Tolerance". Even managed to tag the Christians this time. You guys keep it up, we'll laugh all the way to the 08 elections.

Blassingame said...

It's also possible that Condi could replace Cheney in August or September of 2006, in time to effect the November elections. Imagine the impact of Bush nominating

Of course, maybe he will nominate Harriet Miers.

Blassingame said...

You guys keep it up, we'll laugh all the way to the 08 elections.
Talk is cheap.

Grumpy Old Man said...

Hypothetical strategy: Cheney resigns on grounds of ill health, Bush makes Condi VP, and voilá, she's the nominee with the prestige of high office.

That said, I like Giuliani better, in spite of his stand on social issues and his marital history. National security is Issue No. 1, and I think he'd be strong on that.

Blassingame said...

...I like Giuliani better, in spite of his stand on social issues

Do you mean, like abortion? hmmp.

Blassingame said...

The only question is whether they can be further duped into forgoing their natural prejudges and vote for a black woman."

...to quote myself. The fact is Rice would do better to forswear her Republican allegiance and run as a Democrat. Clinton/Rice '08

Fenrisulven said...

"The fact is Rice would do better to forswear her Republican allegiance and run as a Democrat. Clinton/Rice '08"

Keep dreaming. There's good reason she's conservative, you lost her a long time ago, and she's not coming back to the Dem Plantation.

Blassingame said...

If you say so. ...And if just saying so is enough.

Etain Peregrine said...

To me Condi is the obvious choice as an heir to the Bush legacy, as much as Libs don't want to hear that from us evil bigoted conservative monsters. Cheney probably won't run and is pretty close to unelectable. Next in line is... Condi! She's smart, she's a good negotiator, she commands respect across the globe... I would like a little more specifics on what she would do domestically but honestly my primary concern these days is a fluid transfer of authority to keep us on track in the war.

Fenrisulven said...

"If you say so. ...And if just saying so is enough...Talk is cheap"

Uh-huh. Go take another look at the three branches of government. Do the Dems control any of them? Do you even understand why?

And its going to get worse for you before it gets better. The only sane people on the Left these days are the DLC - you should dump the Moonbats and listen to the likes of Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller.

The Left has a duty to provide a rational strong vibrant opposition party, for the good of the Nation. Your elitist bigotry & racism isn't going to get you there.

Jack Okie said...

Blassingame:

It's the left who is all blow and no go - and who keeps forgetting which side won the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections. All I have heard from the left / libs over the past several years is hopelessly inaccurate predictions, mischaracterizations and bile. Tiresome and pathetic.

Blassingame said...

Fen,

you’re losing it. Maybe you didn’t get enough attention as a child. I don’t debate irrational ideologues.

Blassingame said...

Jack,

We were speaking hypothetically about future eventualities. I was pointing out that the Republican party base as a democratic cross-section that is not given to voting for a “diverse” candidate. I have made no expression about my politics. Try to follow along.

Don Meaker said...

I would rather hear Condi on the piano than Hillary.

I know that Hillary's notion of health care has been found wanting: have the Government come up with the flu vaccine to be produced, pay someone to make it, then give it away. Before Hillary, we had 7 or more US companies making flu vaccine. Now we have none, and the single variety of vaccine produced in foreign countries can be contaminated or may not work against the strain that actually has mutated.

Whe would make the entire US healthcare system just as ineffective, just as slow to respond, and just as bureaucratized. No Thanks.
s

Blassingame said...

Before Hillary, we had 7 or more US companies making flu vaccine. As I recall, Hillary's health care plan was voted down. I'm not seeing the connection. Is this more muddying?

Fenrisulven said...

"I don’t debate irrational ideologues."

1) You're not debating here, just trying to smear Republicans with your elitist bigotry.

2) I said: "The Left has a duty to provide a rational strong vibrant opposition party, for the good of the Nation." So much for my being an "ideologue". I recognize that BOTH parties have differing strengths that compliment each other and make this nation great.

I want the Dems to come out of the wilderness, for the good of the Nation. While your responses lean toward "people are ignorant and easily fooled". I'm sure the Proletariat had the same response when the wall came down... ideologue indeed.

But please, go ahead and "bravely run away". Go troll your bigoted stereotypes back at DU.

Blassingame said...

Fen,

Thank you for being so demonstrative of my assertions regarding your mental health.

Fenrisulven said...

LOL. How lame. Whats next, a spelling flame?

Blassingame said...

1) You're not debating here, just trying to smear Republicans with your elitist bigotry.

Isn’t this calling the kettle black, so to speak. I mean, I asserted that a significant faction of the Republican party are too prejudice to vote for a black woman for president, then you say I’m a bigot. I don’t follow your lack of reasoning.

2) I said: "The Left has a duty to provide a rational strong vibrant opposition party, for the good of the Nation."

This is where I start to think of you as insane. It’s not “mommie and daddy”, the Democrats and Republicans. Sometimes political philosophies are mutally exclusive, don't you think?

I want the Dems to come out of the wilderness…

What, and concur with Republicans. Then they wouldn’t be democrats, would they?

…for the good of the Nation.

There he goes again…speaking ex cathedra about what’s good for the nation.

While your responses lean toward "people are ignorant and easily fooled".

Well half of the population does, by definition, have an I.Q. of less than 100. And the right seems pretty well adapt at exploiting that fact.

I'm sure the Proletariat had the same response when the wall came down...

Okay, now who’s into class warfare?

But please, go ahead and "bravely run away". Go troll your bigoted stereotypes back at DU.

“These colors don’t run.” “Bring it on.” “Mission accomplished.” "God bless Amerka."

Blassingame said...

Fen, also, if you would, please reserve the "LOL" style brevity codes for your online child exploitation activities.

knoxgirl said...

You've gotta be in a pretty deep state of denial to denounce conservatives as racist in the middle of a thread of FULL of conservative Condi-supporters! Without exception, it's liberals speaking out against Condi, not conservatives!

Just how exactly do you guys rationalize that she is already Secretary of State for a republican administration? I've heard the disgusting "House Slave" explanation, what else you got?

"Racist Pig" is no longer a term reserved for conservatives.... those days are over.

GO CONDI GO

Nor said...

Rice/McCain = unstoppable.

blassingame: Please say something of intellectual substance and restore my hope the Dems will actually have a platform that transcends disinformation, hate and vitriol.

Blassingame said...

knoxgirl,
Please take note that I did not denounce Rice. I merely asserted that I beleive the Republican party is still to racist to nominate a black woman. Let's try to keep the facts straight -- at least the ones that are in print right in front of your face.

Fenrisulven said...

"I mean, I asserted that a significant faction of the Republican party are too prejudice to vote for a black woman for president, then you say I’m a bigot."

You employed bigoted stereotypes to make your point:

Quote: "A large percentage of Republican support comes from Archie Bunker style, Bible thumping, hypocrite, ignoramus bigots...the racist spirits that lurk in heart of the rural, mill worker, farmhand (yee-haw) and urban hand-gun aficionado, closeted bigot faction."


"I don’t follow your lack of reasoning."

Thats become obvious.

You've trolled your elitist bigotry about the Heartland, the South, Christians, Gun Owners, Farmers, etc. We get it, now how about unhijacking this Condi thread pls?

"please reserve the "LOL" style brevity codes for your online child exploitation activities."

My bad. I thought I was talking with an adult. LOL.

Blassingame said...

Fen,
Maybe you and knoxgirl should hook up. You seem to be on about the same irrational wavelength, and she sounds like she may be underaged.

knoxgirl said...

Beale said..."If I'm so insecure, what am I doing posting comments on this blog? "

It doesn't take much nerve to post comments anonymously on the internet!

"I'm truly interested in what the big deal is with Condi. You seem pretty certain, perhaps you can tell me."

Condi comes across as supremely capable in every respect, it's that simple. And I'd be lying if I said I wasn't especially enthusiastic because she's a woman.

I object to your criticism of her because, to be honest, it sounds like you don't like her because she intimidates you. We're talking about a very accomplished person, and a person who does not back down under great pressure from the anti-war media (thank god).

Of all criticisms to come up with, for Condoleeza Rice you chose "insecurity"...

? ? ?

knoxgirl said...

blassingame if my response was not accurate it's because I wasn't talking to you!

Simon said...

azlibertarian said...
"You heard it here first...Rice/Rummy '08"

Right now, Donald Rumsfeld is six heart attacks from the Presidency, and in my opinion - as a Republican who supported, and continues to support the liberation of Iraq - that's quite close enough, thankyou very much.

knoxgirl said...

Simon: LOL! me too.

Fenrisulven said...

blassingame: "Maybe you and knoxgirl should hook up. You seem to be on about the same irrational wavelength, and she sounds like she may be underaged."

LOL. More ad hominem distraction. You keep impaling your credibility with your own sword, and have outed yourself as a Moonbat. No futher response to you is required.

/ignore blassingame

Back on topic [apologies to all]:

I would campaign for Condi, but I don't want to see her drafted, I think she needs to be vetted through the primary system. Problem is she's a policy wonk, not a politician, so I'm not sure she'll run. I'm wondering Condi approved the trial balloon [assuming it is] by Laura.

But if Cheney were to retire, wouldn't Condi be the obvious replacement? Or would she be more effective as Secretary of State?

Simon said...

"You've gotta be in a pretty deep state of denial to denounce conservatives as racist in the middle of a thread of FULL of conservative Condi-supporters!"

Without meaning to detract from the arguing over the racial angle (frankly, I couldn't care less whether someone is white, black, or purple polka-dot), I'm interested in how conservative Condi supporters rationalize their support for her against her stated (supportive) views on affirmative action and abortion, which are antithetical to conservative values? I appreciate that if the President's role was only as originally envisioned - i.e., primarily concerned with foreign and security concerns - that these points would not be of concern, and her obvious appeal as a continuation of the Bush doctrine in foregin policy would be stronger. But we are not electing her to the Presidency that was, or even which might have been; we are talking about nominating someone who is pro-choice and pro-AA to an office which appoints Judges, and who has enormous influence by setting the national tone.

How do those conservatives who support Condi square their support against these things?

Blassingame said...

Sure, Fen, start quoting Robert's now that your entire "message" has been otherwise debunked and you have tacitly acknowledged being a child molester.

Fenrisulven said...

/ignore blassingame

Simon - I've followed her statements, and haven't seen anything definitve marking her stance re this issues. Could you link those statements pls?

As for abortion, bear in mind that most Republicans support it in a limited context - 1st trimester, no partial-birth abortions, parental consent, etc. Our opposition to RoeVWade stems more from our desire to have it returned to the states, so that the public can debate and vote on it, instead of the courts.

Henry C said...

Actually, Fenrisulven did tacitly acknowledge it in this exchange:
"please reserve the "LOL" style brevity codes for your online child exploitation activities."

My bad. I thought I was talking with an adult. LOL.

Fenrisulven said...

/Simon - here's what I have on Condi re abortion [sry can't find the link], begins:

Miss Rice said abortion should be "as rare a circumstance as possible," although without excessive government intervention. "We should not have the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other... So, for instance, I've tended to agree with those who do not favor federal funding for abortion, because I believe that those who hold a strong moral view on the other side should not be forced to fund it."

Describing pro-lifers as "the other side" is one of the ways Miss Rice articulates her position as a "mildly pro-choice" Republican. She explained that she is "in effect kind of libertarian on this issue," adding: "I have been concerned about a government role...I am a strong proponent of parental notification. I am a strong proponent of a ban on late-term abortion. These are all things that I think unite people and I think that that's where we should be."

"We ought to have a culture that says, 'Who wants to have an abortion? Who wants to see a daughter or a friend or a sibling go through something like that?' "

Miss Rice described abortion as an "extremely difficult moral issue" which she approaches as "a deeply religious person."

"My faith is a part of everything that I do," she said. "It's not something that I can set outside of anything that I do, because it's so integral to who I am."

Fenrisulven said...

"Actually, Fenrisulven did tacitly acknowledge it in this exchange"

My bad, I assumed I didn't need sarcasm tags in response to such bile.

Gene C Evans said...

Blassingame said...
Fen, also, if you would, please reserve the "LOL" style brevity codes for your online child exploitation activities.

How is this any better than goober_snatcher's racial slur? Implying that someone is a pedophile is, if anything, even worse.

Gene

Harvard Gal said...

Dateline had a special about online child molesters. Leave those kids alone, Fenrisulven

Fenrisulven said...

Thanks gene, but my skin is thicker than that - no worries.

Leave it up pls - its yet another example of what the Left resorts to when they run out of ideas.

LOL Harvard Gal.

Harvard Gal said...

"Actually, Fenrisulven did tacitly acknowledge it in this exchange"

My bad, I assumed I didn't need sarcasm tags in response to such bile.


Are you sure it wasn't just a Freudian slipe. Are you begging to get apprehended?

Harvard Gal said...

I meant to say “Freudian slip.”

Fenrisulven said...

"Are you begging to get apprehended?"

Uh no, I'm not into *that* either. ;)

Harvard Gal said...

I think that I had better forward this entire transcript to the F.B.I. just to be sure.

Simon said...

Before I write any kind of substantive response, can I profess amusement (possibly unfair, since he's new) at Fenrisulven presuming to tell me what the GOP's positon on abortion and Roe are? ;)

Harvard Gal said...

I like you, Simon.

Gene C Evans said...

Simon- How do I rationalize her positions on abortion/affirmative action? Easily. I do not expect perfection in a candidate; good enough is good enough.

Condi impresses me more than any of the other Republican hopefuls and so I want to see her run. Unless the Dems run Zell Miller against her she would get my vote.

Gene

Harvard Gal said...

"Good enough" isn't good enough for the RNC for whom you are either all-in-all or out of the tent as they have been commandeered by ultra-right ideologues.

knoxgirl said...

Lots of projecting going on today:

Beale her/his insecurities
Blass his pedophilia
Harvard Gal her party's shrinking tolerance and "tent"

Harvard Gal said...

knoxgirl, you're an idiot.

Harvard Gal said...

Note that Fen, more than likely, really is a pedophile since he has not been heard from since learning that I was forwarding the transcript to the F.B.I.

But please, go ahead and "bravely run away". Go troll your bigoted stereotypes back at DU.

who's running now, Fen?

knoxgirl said...

Let me get this straight. You guys are jumping on here to:

1. tell a bunch of conservatives who support a black female for president that conservatives can't *possibly* support a black female for president.

and to

2. tell a bunch of conservatives who are willling to accept that Condi might be pro-choice that conservatives would never accept that Condi might be pro-choice.


? ? ?

Fenrisulven said...

"who's running now, Fen?'

I'm still here, just waiting for something worth responding too. If you think calling me a pedophile will stifle dissent or intimidate me from posting, you're outta luck. Although I love you way you Lefties operate. Whats next? Slash my tires and key my car? LOL.

I also note that both you and Blassingame have Jan 06 blogger accounts. One of your many troll accounts Blas/Harvard? Maybe Ann can confirm thru your ISP...

knoxgirl said...

just wanna end on a positive note:

GO CONDI GO

Ivan Lenin said...

2. tell a bunch of conservatives who are willling to accept that Condi might be pro-choice that conservatives would never accept that Condi might be pro-choice.

Yep, because this bunch of conservatives is not representative of the bunch of conservatives who'll decide the nomination. Just like MoveOn.org is not representative of people who actually vote on the election day.

I am on Condi's bandwagon btw. I'm just trying to keep up the diversity of opinion and pragmatism on this wagon.

Harvard Gal said...

No.

1) All Republicans are charlatans and closeted bigots and useful idiots, and
2) Rice is a RINO…ALATAPII (Republican in name only…as long as there’s a paycheck in it) and the Republican base is so ignorant and huckabuck and backwater that they would never nominate her, even if she did pass muster.

Fenrisulven said...

"Before I write any kind of substantive response, can I profess amusement (possibly unfair, since he's new) at Fenrisulven presuming to tell me what the GOP's positon on abortion and Roe are?"

You're free to be amused, but my analysis is backed by polling data and focus groups. Most conservatives don't want abortion banned, they want it restricted and returned to the states for the people to decide. It may not dovetail with your misconceptions re the GOP, but I've worked the GOTV efforts and seen the data.

I assumed you asked the question in good faith? Do you have something to add other than personal attacks?

Harvard Gal said...


I assumed you asked the question in good faith? Do you have something to add other than personal attacks?


no, just more personal attack, ...if outing an admitted child molester qualifies as personal attack.

Ivan Lenin said...

All Republicans are charlatans and closeted bigots and useful idiot

HarvardGal:
1)look in the mirror lately?
Your snobbish bigotry against those you disagree with is obvious, and your projection is both dumb and useful. Congratulations, baby, you're on candid camera.

Fenrisulven said...

"the Republican base is so ignorant and huckabuck and backwater"

Ah yes, the Howard Dean strategy to win back the Red States.

Smile for Instalaunche. With every post, you push another moderate to the right.

Harvard Gal said...

Ivan,

Your argument follows the same ol' "no i'm not, so are you" template that this entire site as well as the ultra-right as a whole is repleat with. Don't go through life as a brainwashed jackobite ninny. Try thinking for yourself for once.

Harvard Gal said...

"the Republican base is so ignorant and huckabuck and backwater"

Ah yes, the Howard Dean strategy to win back the Red States.

Smile for Instalaunche. With every post, you push another moderate to the right.


...and I suppose your admitted child molestation is going to attract supporters?

Fenrisulven said...

Blassingame/Harvard Gal: "...and I suppose your admitted child molestation is going to attract supporters?"

They'll see it for the obvious smear that it is, and blame you. Americans are smarter than you give them credit for. Thats why you keep losing elections.

Harvard Gal said...

They'll see it for the obvious smear that it is, and blame you. Americans are smarter than you give them credit for. Thats why you keep losing elections.

Strange, I don't recall having run for office. And, no, I don't think Americans are very smart at all. I also think the ultra-right has quite a knack for exploiting their ignorance. But when the wagon finally goes into the ditch (as much as W likes to go around declaring "Mission Accomplished" we're not out of Iraq yet) everyone is going to know who to blame, no matter how hard Republicans try to blame the left.

Ivan Lenin said...

Try thinking for yourself for once
Says a troll who puts 'Harvard' in their nickname...
Keep going :)

Buck said...

I don't now who this Fenrisulven guy is, but if I caught up with a child molester, I would have to pray to God to help me to not to do physical violence to him. Fenrisulven, let me give you some advise: turn yourslef in and get some help.

Fenrisulven said...

LOL. Another troll with a Jan 06 blog account. Love the way you Lefties try to smear anyone who disagrees with you.

Buck said...

Let me tell you something Mr. child molester, I first voted for Richard in 1972 and I vote straight a straight Repubican party ticket in every election since. I can forgive a lefty but there's no excuse for doing all your naughty business preversions with children, you sick bastard.

Blassingame said...

Hey Fenrisulven,

I think a LOL would be very apropos in this instance. In fact double LOL.

Fenrisulven said...

You're projecting again Blassingame/Harvard Gal/Buck.

I called you on your racist bigotry, and you resort to typical lefty debate tactics - accusations of child molestation.

I hope Ann gets your ISP yanked.

Go fetch another troll accout so everyone can see that all the Left has to offer America is bile.

Blassingame said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Blassingame said...

LOL, you're insane.

sarnac said...

IMHO, Laura Bush's "trial baloon" was no trial ... just a heads-up to the rest of the republicans thinking of running that now may not be their best time since Condi is being groomed to replace GWB.

1) I doubt LB would say something this significant without it being vetted.

2) In Russia last year, whilst being interviewed live on Russian Radio with questions by Russian schoolkids, Condi responded to "are you going to run for president" with "Da. ... Nyet, Nyet, Nyet, Nyet." She did not misunderstand the question of fumble yes vs no ... she was responding to questions while translating and forgot to "stick to the gameplan" of doing nothing about 2008 while serving as SecState.

3) I have an odd feeling Cheney did not _need_ that cane completely and might have managed without, but is setting the USA up for his departure later this year (or earlier) ... his health is only going to deteriorate.

4) There is another possibility after Condi is sworn in as VP ... remember what happens to presidents elected in years ending in "0" (RR effectively counts ... his heart had stopped after he was shot).
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Please do not feed the trolls by responding to their provocations or babble.

Fenrisulven said...

Blassingame
On blogger since: Jan 06
Blog name: asdlkfjalkd

Buck
On blogger since: Jan 06
Blog name: lkadjsflkadjsflk

Harvard Gal
On blogger since: Jan 06

/ignore Blassingame/HarvardGal/Buck

Blassingame said...

Go fetch another troll accout so everyone can see that all the Left has to offer America is bile.

How would me doing anything show anything about "the left." I think your behavior proves Ferrat's Last Theorem -- Absurd. Besides, my "lefty" membership lapsed.

Fenrisulven said...

maw: "I doubt LB would say something this significant without it being vetted."

Thats a good point. Replacing Cheney as VP before the 06 elections would be smart. The effects would go beyond prepping her to run in 08.

And I've got the trolls on ignore now. :)

Simon said...

Fenrisulven,
The reason I am amused at your presumption is that I am fully conversant what the GOP's position on abortion and Roe since I'm a Republican and am active in both moderate and more conservative Republican circles. The question was indeed asked in good faith, but I think you misunderstood the impetus behind the question. I'm not trying to trip up all those beastly Republicans on their own convictions - I am one of those beastly Republicans, and - as I have already mentioned at least twice in this thread - I am far from opposed to a Rice candidacy. I understand why a lot of Republicans like Condi - electing her would, in all likelihood be, in many ways be a continuation of the current administration. I'm not opposed to that; I would welcome that.

I do, however, find the willingness to throw down so strongly behind a candidate on whose views we know so little to be troubling. Hence, my questrion was in good faith, insofar as it was asking people who I assume share a general outlook with me why they aren't troubled by things that trouble me. I can accept a candidate who is - let's be polite - "squishy" on abortion, I can even accept a candidate who is half-hearted about affirmative action; as noted above, I would like Olympia Snowe to run in the primary, although I thereby pass no judgement on whether I want her to win. But Snowe has a ong and voluminous record on all sorts of issues that directly relate to the business of being President, which makes me a little more comfortable about the prospect of her candidacy. I would like Condi to run, but as with Snowe, I would stop short - far shorter than I would with Snowe, actually - of endorsing her until I know more about her views on relevant subjects.

The reality is that I am probably more conservative than either of the candidates floated here; my preference would be someone like Newt Gingrich, but without the asshole factor. But the reality is that someone's personal conduct DOES matter; it mattered that Clinton was untrustworthy, and it matters that Gingrich is a hypocrit who has never apologized. So we work with what we have.

In reality, I don't think there IS an ideal candidate waiting in the wings for 2008. I have an open mind on Rice, and I certainly do appreciate suggestions from those who do trust her of why I should too.

XWL said...

Any speculation on which old troll is the new hydra like blassingame/harvard gal/buck troll?

My money's on thersites.

(although quxxo's been strangely silent, but these posts are vile and ignorant where as quxxo's just annoying and narcissistic)

Also, the Instalanche doesn't always bring positive attention, clearly all the folks frustrated by Instapundit's lack of a comment section to ruin have clicked through to here to satisfy their primal need for territorial markings.

Also, Sec. Rice is too needed in her current role to become Vice President. A smarter choice would be to encourage former Sec. Colin Powell to unretire, it would show that Pres. Bush doesn't hold grudges and that Powell wasn't forced out as speculation suggested.

But I think all the health rumors swirling around Vice President Cheney are exaggerated and he'll be Vice President all the way up until the day that President George Allen is sworn in. (With the new Vice President Rice by his side).

Goatwhacker said...

I think Condi's major advantage is that she's perceived as highly electable. Pragmatic conservatives realize that a strong candidate who agrees with them most of the time is better than a weak candidate who agrees with them all of the time.

On the racial/gender issue, certainly there are racist or sexist conservatives out there but no where near as many as some liberals seem to think. For the great majority of conservatives political views are much more important - I've found that to be true even on the very far right discussion boards. For the extreme righties her position on abortion will probably be her biggest problem.

RogerA said...

What Goatwhacker said! an excellent summary. I would add my perception that "the issues" are simply not as important as editorial writers and pundit assume them to be--yes, Dr. Rice may be a bit squishy on abortion to satisfy a few ultra-conservatives, but no more so than the avereage democrat could satisfy NARAL or other extremist left wing groups-

I have absolutely no data to support the following assertion: I think perceptions of character are increasingly the most important element of electability. And I believe Dr. Rice's education, experience, and resume are all supportive of her potential candidacy.

Simon said...

"Dr. Rice may be a bit squishy on abortion to satisfy a few ultra-conservatives, but no more so than the avereage democrat could satisfy NARAL or other extremist left wing groups"

I don't think that the "average democrat" candidate is an appropriate comparison. A more appropriate comparison would be, "Dr. Rice may be a bit squishy on abortion to satisfy a few ultra-conservatives, but no more so than Bob Casey Jr. upsets NARAL or other extremist left wing groups."

The average Democratic candidate is for abortion on demand. Some are for reasonable restrictions on abortion, and the only reason they get a pass from NARAL is because those organizations are genuinely and honestly terrified of the consequences of tarring a nominee too heavily. They're wrong about the issue, but they're not morons: they realize that a Democratic Congressman who is opposed to partial-birth abortion is better than a GOP Congressman who is opposed to abortion, period.

You have to realize, I think that it is not just that Rice is out of step with the fringe with the GOP on abortion, she is out of step with the vast bulk of the GOP on abortion. While there is considerable range of opinion on the matter - from mild regulation through to ban it outright, even the moderate wing is still more sceptical about abortion than Rice, even notwithstanding quotes posted above. Rice is willing to accomodate it, and that's fine. Is she willing to appoint replacements for Stevens and Ginsburg (who will likely retire on the next President's watch, pulling either a Sandy O'Connor or a Bill Brennan, one or the other) who will overrule Roe, Casey and (if it's still on the books) Stenberg?

Once those cases are off the books, the pernicious corruption of American politics that has stemmed from Roe will cease (or at least, shift to another venue), and moderates might have more of a shot at winning the Presidency. I'm not writing off Rice, but I would really need to have some pretty strong indications that she is not only opposed to abortion personally, but that she will fulfill the responsibility she would swear to undertake on election as the President of the United States, which is to end the constitutionalization of the abortion question.

ChrisO said...

Trying to get past all of the ad hominem stuff...

Its a political truism that elections are decided by the middle. And if you think the middle is solidly Republican I think you're all in for a bit of a letdown. George Bush lost the popular vote in 2000, and won by 3 percent in 2004 (and no, that's not a "mandate.") The Democrats lost the House in 94 largely because the voters perceived them as fat, happy and arrogant, and corrupted by years of power. I think the Abramoff scandal has the potential to have the same effect on the Republicans. Remember, the Republicans gained 50 seats in 94. The Democrats need 15-20 IIRC to take control. The Republicans picked up a net five House seats in 2004, all of which came from the Texas redistricting. So while I'm getting used to Republican triumphalism, I think the Democrats are in better shape than you might like to acknowledge.

As for Condi,I can see the level of racial hypocrisy we're going to see from the Republicans. fenrisulven describes the smears that he predicts will happen, then describes them as "pathetic." Interesting value judgement on something that hasn't even happened yet. If you're paying attention, you'll notice that the Democrats don't go after Rice particularly hard. She has shown some skill as a negotiator, but the fact remains that she is closely tied to the Bush administration and the Iraq war (even more so if the Condi-to-VP wet dream comes true) and I hate to break it to you all, but Bush isn't particularly popular these days, and neither is the war. The Iraqi election was successful if your entire definition of success is that it happened, but the end result has so far created even more divisions in the country, and many Iraqis are very disillusioned.

It's also interesting that so many people are willing to overlook Rice's stance on abortion. I belive there's another potential candidate who has pro-choice issues, despite actually having a pretty solid anti-choice voting record. John McCain has an organization, an electoral history, a positive reputation enhanced by his stance on torture, and a record on campaign finance that makes him one of the few Republicans who can distance himself from the Abramoff scandal. If the posters on this board think that Rice's close identification with Bush is some kind of huge plus with the general electorate, I think you're living in a bubble.

As for the base, I like this board because there's a lot of intelligent discussion, and I like to see what arguments are made by reasonable people who hold views different from me. However, when it is suggested that Rice will run into opposition from a lot of the Republican base because of her race, you protest that the support for her on this board somehow belies that. Do you really think the majority of the base spends time debating Alito's stance on the commerce clause? The middle that put Bush over the top in 2004 isn't married to the Republican party, and they're not the base. I don't think that you can place any one description on a party's base. I, for one, can't see myself ever voting Republican, yet I find much about Cindy Sheehan to be frankly embarrassing. Yet both Sheehan and I are considered part of the Democratic base.

Similarly, conservative Christians and gun owners are a reliable part of the base, as are moderate pro-business types and ideological neo-conservatives. Because you identify with one group doesn't mean the other doesn't exist.

Finally, Zell Miller is a Democrat only in the eyes of Republicans, and Steele was never pelted with Oreos, despite what the right-wing bloggers would have us think.

I. Ronnie said...

Terrence said:

I'd say its unlikely that a bachelor could be elected President. Could 40-something single woman?

Um... James Buchanon?

37383938393839383938383 said...

It's possible that a woman without a husband and/or kids can be seen as more in charge, more steely,

Not really. Most people see these women as pathetic or emotionally cold or as lesbians. Plus, all great women leaders have had kids, perhaps because most women give birth and women who care for dependents have a different, more mature view of the world (and so are unlikely to vote for a Sex in the City-type.