Rice/Boxer

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Glad to see you watching Oreilly Smurph--even if you disagree-its interesting. Did you see deal on Micheal Moore last night?
I treat O'Reilly like I would anyone else - issue to issue. That's why don't agree with everything generally considered as Democrat (ACLU issues, death penalty, welfare, immigration, Israel, etc etc). Of course I don't take what O'reilly says as being worth much either, as he is so slanted sometimes it's ridiculous. Why does he even care about Moore at this point? Isn't there ACTUAL news to cover? It's not like voters need to be swayed anymore.

On the other point, that's why a said maybe it's "human nature" - although I should probably have said "political nature".

Why bring up Clinton examples? Again - who cares? - move on. The country was different then the mistakes of that administration had far less grave implications to us all than those of this administration.

My intent is not to raise Boxer on a pedestal either. I'll bet she was selected/volunterred to do play "bad cop" in the confirmation charade. I'm trying to separate the issue of Rice's failures from the political game.

For the sake of moving on, let's just call all the political garbage a wash. Nobody's clean, both sides suck. OK then - now we can simply discuss the failures of Rice in pre-911 and pre-Iraq. What mistakes did she make? What assurances are there that she's now able to handle the Sec. of State job. It's only our entire security in the balance.
 

Master Capper

Emperior
Forum Member
Jan 12, 2002
9,104
11
0
Dunedin, Florida
Rice is worthless as you might as well just fill the position with Pee Wee Herman! Anyone whom cannot or will not answer questions with all honesty does not deserve to be put in a position where we as citizens rely on them for guidance. I salute Boxer for exposing this idiot for what she is, just like Clarke did in his book! Down with Bush and his ass clowns and the Patriot Act and up with Democracy for the American people.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
mc quote:"Anyone whom cannot or will not answer questions with all honesty does not deserve to be put in a position where we as citizens rely on them for guidance."


unfortunately.....politicians on both sides of the aisle don't answer questions honestly....ie...robert mcnamara. richard nixon, bill clinton, & on & on & on.

the thing with boxer is that she made it personal...
yesterday there were many black leaders complaining about how rice has been treated......because of this i wouldn't be surprised to see more blacks voting republican over the years.

and this is another example of how poorly the democrats are coming across. it's one thing to question somebody on issues, but it's another thing to make it look vindictive....which is what boxer, kennedy,kerrey, & that great civil rights activist, robert byrd is coming across.

if the dems don't change their way....the party is going to go the way of the whig party.....they have lost seats in the house, the senate, the governor mansions each year since 2000.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Well it'll be a damn shame if things get worse for this country, while all the majority Republicans can do whine about Boxer or someone else making a personal attack on one of Bush's cronies.

It's only personal if you take it personally. These people bash each other all the tiime. It shouldn't be surprising or newsworthy at all. This whole story seems to be nothing more than a way for the Republicans to avoid the actual issue of Rice's performance.
 

Master Capper

Emperior
Forum Member
Jan 12, 2002
9,104
11
0
Dunedin, Florida
AR182,

I disagree that they were vindictive, as all she had to do was answer a question honestly, is it that tough to do? I think alot of the anger stemmed from frustration in just trying to get her to speak the truth. Don't get me wrong, I feel not just Republicans but any elected official has a duty to speak truthfully to the constituents whom elected them or pay their salaries! I also disagree that the Dems will become a extinct party as we both know these things go in cycles and all it takes is for the public to lose confidence in the direction of the country and the tide turns the other way. The Dems definitely need to gather themselves and get a clear message and find a leader to bring forth their message but I highly doubt that the Republican message will continue to be the message that is still the trump card within the next few years. There are two many potential land-mines littering the landscape for them to not begin to take a hit such as the deficit which is going to explode from Bush's actions, Iraq is and will continue to be a error and job creation will continue to be a problem as we shift from a manufacturing t oa service economy (although this is not a Republican only problem but the people usually blame the folks at the top) and I don't think the god, gays and abortion card can sustain power. Personally, I would like to see both parties banned and a new system started with up to five choices and each man or woman has a limited amount to spend when running for election as this would in my opinion bring out better choices and newer ideas. When we as citizens are forced to choose between two ass clowns like Bush and Kerry then we have reached a point where changes should/need to be made!
 

Englishman

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 20, 2003
2,268
26
0
Lincoln Park, New Jersey
It's just great watching the Dems shoot themselves all the time. No wonder they are opposed to guns! They just don't get it at all, and I'm delighted. Rice, Gonzales, Gore, Kerry, Hilliary coming up....they just don't get it.

Us conservatives should just shut up and let the left continue to destroy themselves in the eyes of the American people.

You don't think the people see through the harrassment of great Americans like Rice and Gonzales??

It's a wonderful thing.

Carry on you lame-ass libs....
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
mc,

i agree that there should be more than 2 political parties....but the dems. & republicans won't let it happen.

the reason why i say( i hope it doesn't happen) that the dems. could have a problem is because of 9/11.......i don't believe that many americans trust the leading democrats to run our country post 9/11.bush was very vulnerable in this past election...but the people weren't comfortable with kerry......the dems will also make a major blunder if they elect dean as their chairman.a person that i would like to see in the forefront for 2008 for the dems is evan bayh from indiana....imo he is one of the few dems who understand the war on terrorism (including iraq).

i'm not going to get into now but i see nothing wrong with the patriot act.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
I can't let Dogs last post go by. It is another attack on Clinton! Here we are debating the lying, half truths, failures of Rice and he pops up yet again with Clinton bashing. Again, it is because he cannot defend the lies of Bush, Cheney Rice and Co.
How is it that the Dems are whinning? They are asking her questions. Why doesn't even one Republican have any questions about why she said she knew that Iraq had WMD and was a threat to the U.S. when there is no evidence of that?
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
"Again, it is because he cannot defend the lies of Bush, Cheney Rice and Co."

---and again for the upteenth time you have yet to show us a proven documented lie on any of the above.

---and while you at it see if you can find any testimonys "where they" fail to recall" some 100+ times in testimony.

One again your heavy on opinion but viod of facts--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
AR saw same thing with the blacks climbing on those that opposed Rice--They learn nothing from Dashel--and dig their hole deeper--While Kennedy and Kerry are safe in Mass and Boxer in her disrtict--
the rest can expect to see the continued decline--of which I am not really for--as I think we need checks and balances--but the dems need to take their party back from the liberals to have any hope to avoid self destruction.Have you noticed how Hilliary has been sliding to the middle as predicted.I think one of the most tenasious elections we will see is next dem primary.
While they are for Dean on his ability to draw money they forget one thing--they will always get all the die hard liberal vote regardless of who runs--but their bulk of minority vote is beginning to be in jeopardy and the moderate dems & centrists made their statement last election. I love it every time Kennedy-Kerry and Boxer get on TV.

I wonder what Rice's feelings are about Boxer and how she liked being lectured from someone with a BA in Economics from Brooklyn College. :)
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
DOGS THAT BARK said:
I wonder what Rice's feelings are about Boxer and how she liked being lectured from someone with a BA in Economics from Brooklyn College. :)

What in the world does education have to do with answering questions? Yes, Condi is very intelligent. She showed that in how artfully she dodged any tough questions.

A high school dropout could have come up with the questions Boxer asked because they were so obvious. The dropout probably would have been more tactful, though.
 

Master Capper

Emperior
Forum Member
Jan 12, 2002
9,104
11
0
Dunedin, Florida
AR,

I agree with you on Bayh and I would also toss Richardson into the mix also! I disagree with you though that minorities will turn to Bush or anyone else associated with Bush and vote Republican as four more years of these failed economic policies are going to create a bigger hole for these people to climb out of and most people that are lower income typically vote with their paychecks. I also disagree on the issue of minorities being upset with the questioning of Rice, they were just as equally upset with how Bush has not addressed the NAACP and I can guarentee you that under 10% of the lower income minorities even watched the hearings for Rice.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
Originally Posted by DOGS THAT BARK

I wonder what Rice's feelings are about Boxer and how she liked being lectured from someone with a BA in Economics from Brooklyn College


i didn't know that boxer went to brooklyn college.

i once took a course at brooklyn college...but the course was cancelled because the teacher wound up killing his wife....true story.

does anybody know if she is from bklyn ?

that may help explain her liberal politics.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Name: Barbara Boxer
Birth Date: November 11, 1940
Place of Birth: Brooklyn, New York, United States
Nationality: American
Gender: Female
Occupations: senator
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Boxer Remember won by over 2 million votes this election. I don't remember any of us voting for Rice. Can you see what she would be hit with if running for office. It would make the questions she was asked look simple. I didn't like all questions asked her either. But no one seemed to have the guts to ask if she will be strong enough to take on Cheney and tell Bush he's wrong when he is. A rubber stamp is easy to be.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
"Boxer Remember won by over 2 million votes this election"

Is that how CNN reported it. :)
Re-adjust your calculator ;)

You'll find almost her entire margin of victory in 2 counties LA and San Fran--

Hell DJV even Marion Barry won again in DC

Los Angeles 100.0% of 4,602 precincts reporting

Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Barbara Boxer (I) Dem 1,704,641 66.6%
Bill Jones Rep 734,192 28.7%
Marsha Feinland PFP 57,095 2.2%
Jim Gray Lib 47,508 1.9%
Don Grundmann AIP 16,997 0.7%

San Francisco 100.0% of 578 precincts reporting

Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Barbara Boxer (I) Dem 207,646 82.6%
Bill Jones Rep 32,554 12.9%
Marsha Feinland PFP 5,258 2.1%
Jim Gray Lib 4,745 1.9%
Don Grundmann AIP 1,193 0.5%
 
Last edited:

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Dogs, Rice lied about the WMD and Rice lied about the nuclear threat that Iraq was and she lied about the fact that Iraq was an immediate threat to the United States. You will now most likely come back and say that Clinton thought they had WMD too but you are missing the fact that Clinton didn't kill 1400 Americans trying to prove it. Or not prove it as the case may be. Rice is a liar plain and simple. If you don't like it prove that she didn't sell us on the WMD?
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
No Stevie - it is far more easy to divert attention to the manner in which Boxer attacked Rice's integrity in a personal way than it is to defend Rice in any tangible way. Keep up the Boxer attacks, with the attention span of the average American we'll forget about Rice's performance pretty soon ....at least until the next consequience of her incompetence.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Steve not just Slick but mrs Slick, Kerry and averyone else in fact can you find "one person" prior to us going into Iraq that said they absolutely had none??

--and once again under your definition of lying---

Mrs Slick was speaking on healthcare issues last week and in her statement said ,we all know pre-existing conditions are not covered in health ins--which is entirely erroneous. Does that make her a liar or just incompetant of the facts??? I would think the latter.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
article I promised when it came to print
Remember that Juan of NPR,who is black, generally slants hard left on issues----

African-American Support for Rice

Thursday, January 27, 2005


ANDREW YOUNG, CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER: Condoleezza Rice not only deserves the support, but the country needs a strong, wise secretary of state with a bipartisan mandate to help establish democracy, not only in Iraq but around the world.

C. DELORES TUCKER, NAT?L CONGRESS OF BLACK WOMEN: How could she say that she supports the democracy when a democracy does not support a woman that they know is more qualified than any other we have had in this position, especially for such a time as this in America?

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

BRIT HUME, HOST: When those two veteran civil rights leaders spoke out yesterday, they were putting themselves on the side of President Bush and Condoleezza Rice and against prominent Senate Democrats. That, to say the least, is unusual. What?s going on here and why is this.

For answers, we turn to FOX News contributor, veteran Washington journalist and chronicler of the Civil Rights Movement (search), Juan Williams.

Juan, welcome. Nice to see you my friend.

JUAN WILLIAMS, SENIOR CORRESPONDENT, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: Good to be here my friend.

HUME: Thanks for being here.

HUME: Talk to me a little bit about what ? how you interpret that event yesterday. I was struck by the event. Were you as well?

WILLIAMS: Oh, let me just tell you something. The phone has been ringing off the hook with people saying, wait a second. Why are they beating up on Condoleezza Rice (search) in terms of the president?s policy in Iraq? What?s going on? Why don?t they take on the big boy and go after the president. That is who they want to go after. But why go after someone who is imminently qualified?

There is no debate about Condoleezza Rice?s qualifications. There is no debate about the fact that she is truly representative of the president?s perspective point of view and the president wants her in the job. And there is no question; it seems to me, that Condoleezza Rice has been forth coming in explaining her position to this ? to the senators who have been grilling her.

So people have a sense, and I think African-Americans in particular, have a sense of grievance that, wait a second, why are you picking on this woman who ? I mean, Brit, you know her, I know her.

Astounding personal history not only in terms of civil rights activity. She?s from Birmingham. One of her friends was killed in the 16- Street bombing back in those days, but I mean this was a provost at Stanford, extraordinary person.

And the idea that she has the bear the entire policy at this moment, and have the nomination delays so that she could not go overseas and participate in some of the key foreign policy activities taking place this week, I think a lot of people think you know what? They are just picking on Condoleezza Rice unfairly.

HUME: She would be the first African-American woman obviously to be secretary of state.

WILLIAMS: Correct.

HUME: Also today Alberta Gonzales?s nomination was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He would be the first Hispanic to serve in that job. All Democrats voted no. Democrats have been pretty well able to count on the votes of minorities in this country and of African-Americans in particular. The president did a little better, up from nine percent in 2000 to what?

WILLIAMS: Eleven percent. Right.

HUME: Eleven percent in 2004. Is it possible the Democratic senators and others feel that, look, African-Americans are going to be Democrats,would you say. We have really always been with them. We are in no danger of losing their votes. Is that, at this point in your judgment, a warranted assumption?

WILLIAMS: Well, it?s not warranted. You mentioned the president went up from nine percent to 11 percent, but if you look inside the numbers, if you look in California, he was up in terms of African-American vote (search). You look in Ohio, it was up to 16 percent of the black vote. Again, an increase you look in Pennsylvania. And increase if you look in Florida.

Battleground states where the president?s campaign targeted African- American voters, realizing it was going to be a very tight race, the president?s campaign did markedly better than they did in 2000. And the issues they did better on tended to be issues of social concern, issues ranging from gay marriage to abortion rights. These are issues were you find a substantial, church-going, conservative black community and those are people who get out and vote. And they did turn out to vote.

When you talk about the Democrats in the Senate assuming that they have the black vote in their pocket and blacks are not going to take umbrage at their treatment, either of Rice or Gonzales as another American minority, I think that?s a little bit of old school politics.

And what we have seen in the last few days, with the president having meetings with the black religious leaders and business leaders, and today with the Congressional Black Caucus (search), is I think the president lending his credibility to a generational shift developing new leadership. The people were not the NAACP (search). They were not the Urban League. They are not the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Dr. King.

These are people who develop churches, who hire people through churches. These are people who buy land in their community to build housing. This is part of the president?s emphasis on race relations, as an extension of his drive for an ownership society.

HUME: And is it your view that this has political effect beyond him? I mean, obviously he?s never going to run again. He will be around for a few years, but he is not going to be running again. Is there any sense, in your view, that there?s a growing trend toward being Republicans in the African-American community?

WILLIAMS: Oh yes. We talked about this before. But if you look at the numbers again, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies did a report, a survey just before the election. In which they found self- identified among young black people, there is tremendous growth in terms of people who identify themselves as either as Independents or conservatives. Not necessarily Republicans, but Independents or conservatives.

What you see there is this again generational shift. Those folks are much more open to hearing the president?s message. And when it comes to an issue, like Social Security, something the president is really honing in on, wait a second, black people die and live shorter lives, shorter life expectancy...

HUME: Black men in particular, right?

WILLIAMS: Black ? especially black men. And therefore, don?t get the full benefit. They could benefit from changes in Social Security (search) and those reforms. That message penetrates with younger black people. And as much I might add, it penetrates with younger white. But what you see is that younger black people are not all sort of automatically opposed to hearing a message from a Republican, conservative president.

It is the older generation that has the difficulty. And I think you see that older generation represented in the likes of Julian Bond, who is now the chairman of the NAACP and locked into that older thinking, that was wedded, I think, the black vote to the Democrat in the civil rights era and with passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act (search).

This newer generation saying, wait a second, what did we get from the Democrat Party in recent years? Where are we going? And who has fresh ideas that relieve some of the tensions and problems in the community today? And that is where President Bush has come forward and saying let?s shake up. Let?s get a new dynamic in place.

HUME: Juan Williams, pleasure to have you. Always good to see you. Thanks, Juan.

WILLIAMS: Good to be with you, Brit.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Surprised to see you use the race card Dogs. Rice has lied about WMD. She helped orchestrate a war that has gone terribly wrong. She should not be rewarded for her effort. And I don't care what color she or anyone else is!
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top