Rice is pro choice. She also has never even run for city council. I hope she doesn't even think about going down this road because she will be eaten alive. That is not to say that she won't be a great S of State. It's just that electoral politics is a different animal.
It is true that we don't have a standard bearer for 08 yet. But we don't need to push the panic button. Hillary will be formidable, but not unstoppable.
On a lighter note, a few trivia questions:
1) Who was the last person who served as S of STate to run for President?
2) Who was the last person who served as S of State to be a nominee of a party for President?
3) Who was the last person who served as S of State serve as President?
I think I know all three, though I am a little less sure of 2 than the others.
Anyone want to hazard guesses?
To play my own trivia game:
1) Who was the last person who served as S of STate to run for President?
Haig. Ran briefly in 1988.
2) Who was the last person who served as S of State to be a nominee of a party for President?
I think this was James G. Blaine, at the end of the 19th century. William Jennings Bryan was nominated again and again by the D's, and eventually served briefly as S of State under Wilson, but that was long after he had been the nominee. (Did Edmund Muskie serve as S of STate? Didn't he run for Pres at some point perhaps in 1976? I'm not sure).
3) Who was the last person who served as S of State serve as President? James Buchanan.
I "think" those are right, though I would welcome any corrections.
If Dubya's calling her "44," it's because of the rumors of her running, not because she plans to run.