user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
I'd gladly vote for her. If she had an original thought of her own, rather than merely parroting the Bushspeak as she did during that nomination hearing. Kudos to Senators Kerry and Boxer for voting nay!
I love Condi , I'd love to see her elected president some day.
The main problems I have with her are 1) She helped come up with the rationale to invade Iraq, and 2) The position of Secretary of State is that of the top diplomat in the country, but her history is that of warhawk and not diplomat.
yeah but truth, don't they all do that? I don't think any president appointed a secretary of state that did not share his views, they are just the extended voice of the presidents policies
Absolutly not. I do not trust her to do what is in the best interest of the country. She would be scared to opposed the administration.
How is it you believe she doesn't have a thought of her own? Because she argees with someone besides you or because she black & therefore can't think for herself? She's one of the smartest people in politics today.
She's a gifted lady, but I wouldn't nominate her. She scares me.
However, I would love to hear her play the piano.
by mojo on Tue Jan 25, 05 3:52pm
[+]
Hanoi Kerry and the Ignorant Liberals: Neigh Neigh Neigh. (Does anybody actually care what Hanoi Kerry thinks, heh heh)
Do Libs know what being smart in politics is, I think not. Condi would make a great secretary of state.
It isn't a race issue at all, everygirl. She's as smart and well spoken as anybody, too. I just really disagree with her policies.
A woman? no way
by ABC on Tue Jan 25, 05 4:06pm
[+]
Just kidding, I have no idea
by ABC on Tue Jan 25, 05 4:07pm
[+]
Hanoi Kerry, lmmfao!! Good one!!
by mojo on Tue Jan 25, 05 4:14pm
[+]
Do we even need a Sec of State?
Bush handles foreign policy what do we need The Sec of State for. It just keeps some of the lies from coming from Bush lips.
Against. While she has the capabilities, she appears to have chosen to sell her ethics short, and a Secretary of State needs ethics.
If i'm a Senator ofcourse i'll vote for her. A Black Female in a high post shows that male senators are sensitive and will help my chances in re-election with the Black and womans vote.
Many will vote with this in mind and not her performance.
I wonder what the headlines would be if the republicans voted against nominating the first black woman secretary of state? I'm sure racist chavanists would come up every now and then.
Ah media bias, gotta love it.
Chevron named an oil tanker Condoleezza Rice after her but later quietly renamed it Altair Voyager. Rice explained on Fox News Sunday that Chevron had a policy of naming tankers after its Directors. Rice was a Director of Chevron from 1991 to 2001. "We made the change to eliminate the unnecessary attention caused by the vessel's original name," Chevron's spokesman, Fred Gorell, told the San Francisco Chronicle.
On the CBS program, Face the Nation in March 2003, Rice claimed the links between al-Qaida and the Iraqi regime were indisputable. "Now the al-Qaida is an organization that's quite disbursed and --and quite widespread in its effects, but it clearly has had links to the Iraqis, not to mention Iraqi links to all kinds of other terrorists. And what we do not want is the day when Saddam Hussein decides that he's had enough of dealing with sanctions, enough of dealing with, quote, unquote, "containment," enough of dealing with America, and it's time to end it on his terms, by transferring one of these weapons, just a little vial of something, to a terrorist for blackmail or for worse."
herzog: You are shameless. You really are.
Your Rightist philosophy puts so much energy into proclaiming "It shouldn't be matter of color," and then you trot out this.
If they were voting against her because she was black or because she was a woman ... I'd be the first to agree with you.
Because that is obviously not the case, I can only assume that you are exercising the same regard for Truth and Reality that we've seen from the Bush Admin for these past four years.
I would definitely vote against her. Not becuase I'm some leftist and I do it just to annoy Bush and his neo-cons, but becuase she helped the president mislead the nation into going to war. Its a shame that Colin Powell, who had such a hopeful outlook and peaceful agenda couldn't get half the chance that Rice will get because the warhawks in the white house (namely Chaney, Bush, and Rumsfeld) didn't agree with him.
Oh please cath, do you honestly believe that if republicans voted against the first black woman Secretary of state that there *wouldn't* be cries of racism from the left? Feinstein, boxer, jackson, sharpton and the rest would simply let it slide? Hell no, they'd jump on this oppurtunity to smear the republican party. Remember what happened when one senator described the US economy as 'niggardly'? A real word with no racist meanings, but he was still attacked as a racist.
Are supposedly right wing people like you afraid of left wing cries of "Racism!", her-blog? Especially when you know you are always right. You suck, old man.
herzog: No, I agree that their would be.
And if those accusations had the same basis, they'd be just as wrong and I'd be agreeing with you, for a change.
'herzog: No, I agree that their would be.
And if those accusations had the same basis, they'd be just as wrong and I'd be agreeing with you, for a change.'
So why'd you disagree with my initial statement? I haven't changed my position, I simply restated it.
She's a terrible person, just trying to further her career and bring war to the infidels. Now she gets to try and pimp American diplomacy to our former allies, while she runs around flaunting her Ph.D.
If I were a senator i would make the decision based on the implications to my bank-balance.
Since Rice was so supportive in sending men, women and children to their graves to add a few 000's to the US oil tycoons profits, and as I undoubtably have my filthy trotters in the black mess...
...yes I would vote for her. Being black serves as a bonus for me too.
Morality of war in Iraq anyone?
Because the resons were not based on race; you imply they do.
or will you now backpedal and say "but I never *said* they were based on race ..."?
You don't have to say. The implication is clearly there.
I never *did* say the reasons were based on race. I merely pointed out the obvious fact that if republicans vote against a black person, for any reason, the usual race-baiters on the left will come out and condemn them as racists. Actual racism has nothing to do with it, and hasn't be a requirment for being publicly denounced for years. All that is necessary is for some republican to do something that negatively reflects on or impacts a black person and it is considered de facto racism, no questions asked.
Like when you said no black people should be allowed in government. Oh don't even try to say 'well I never said that'. The implication was clear.
You were merely playing the victim again -- something that some sets of the GOP have gotten very good at, over the past several years.
I suggest you deal with each issue on the merits of its case, instead of trying to find absolution in generalities.
You yourself agreed with me cath, if the situation were reversed there would be an outcry from the left about racism, regardless of any actual racism being involved.
This is not playing the victim, this is pointing out the obvious.
Let's really point out the obvious: Condi got her job because she's Bush's bimbol
|
|
