Skip to comments.
Rice is much too valuable to take the fall
LA Daily News ^
| 4/3/2004
| Earl Ofari Hutchinson
Posted on 04/04/2004 11:52:53 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 last
To: Political Junkie Too
Bush officials have quickly circled the wagons around her. In their furious counterattack against Clarke, they have all but branded him a liar and a self-serving, book peddling opportunist,Yes, they let Sen. Frist say it outright. :)
41
posted on
04/04/2004 12:35:18 PM PDT
by
StriperSniper
(Ernest Strada Fanclub)
To: StriperSniper
Nope, Clarke's own actions and words have branded him an opportunist and a liar.
42
posted on
04/04/2004 12:36:54 PM PDT
by
Toespi
(,)
To: Toespi
Yes, and Frist called him on it on the floor of the Senate.
43
posted on
04/04/2004 12:39:01 PM PDT
by
StriperSniper
(Ernest Strada Fanclub)
To: Lancey Howard
Steamrollered?!! By Ed Bradley?? I have a Dem friend of mine who watched it, and was mightily impressed with Condi. He felt that exactly the opposite of what you asserted took place. He thought that Rice made Bradley look like a chump.
44
posted on
04/04/2004 1:06:27 PM PDT
by
driftless
( For life-long happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
To: Political Junkie Too
In their furious counterattack against Clarke, they have all but branded him a liar and a self-serving, book peddling opportunist Earl O., Clarke IS a lying, self-serving, book peddling opportunist. He's also a disloyal s.o.b.
45
posted on
04/04/2004 1:12:01 PM PDT
by
Bernard Marx
(In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. But in practice there is.)
To: Political Junkie Too
"A White House damage-control effort has been busily under way, and Rice has dropped her opposition to publicly testifying under oath before the 9-11 Commission. Yet it will take much work to undue the collateral damage from Clarke's attack ..."
This whole media SPIN bothers me immesnely.
Clarke lied, or at least said stuff that was demonstrably false. The White House shouldnt have been the ones to correct this, the MEDIA should have. This description is devoid of the underlying TRUTH at stake: Clarke is simply false when he says that the Clinton administration was serious about terrorism for 8 years but Bush administration didnt do enough in 8 months - facts are stubborn things and they disprove him 100%.
Here we have the usual media stalking-horse technique for dragging the administration down:
1. Find a vehicle for lobbing an unfair attack. (Clarke)
2. Report on it without ANY COMMENT on its veracity, give it as much authority as possible (ie point out how Clarke has served in X many administrations, but fail to point out how he voted for Gore, supports Kerry, and has a book to sell and is possibly exaggerating to garner attention for himself).
3. When nobody in the press critiques it fairly wait for Bush administration to respond. Then label any such comments as a "furious" response and make it sound as political as possible.
The end result: You have succeeded in planting this as a plausible story which only 'Bush supporters' deny, even though the original charge is totally baseless. The media falls down on the job.
Isnt media bias charming?
46
posted on
04/04/2004 1:26:05 PM PDT
by
WOSG
(http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com - Disturb, manipulate, demonstrate for the right thing)
To: Spotsy
Another thing that gets little mention is that the entire month of April, 2001 was taken up with the international incident involving our surveillance plane that was forced down over Hainan Island in China. This was a severe crisis and test for such a young presidency.
No doubt there was a lot of diplomacy behind the scenes even after the crew had been released from their "detainment" (I prefer to consider that they were hostages).
To: Political Junkie Too
Oh yeah, this one could go far in the Republican Party and the rats can't stand it...
48
posted on
04/04/2004 2:05:07 PM PDT
by
hope
(How far will your passion take you?)
To: Inspectorette
Very good point about the China crisis, early 2001.
49
posted on
04/04/2004 2:12:59 PM PDT
by
Spotsy
(Bush-Cheney '04)
To: Political Junkie Too
Most of the Democrats that I know really dislike Rice. The have claimed (since before 2000) that Rice is living in the 1980s and sees the Soviet Union as the main enemy.
My opinion is that the Democrats should worry that their wishes may be granted.
50
posted on
04/04/2004 2:27:56 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: Enterprise
I wouldn't want to be one of the 10 members who didn't bother to attend her closed door meeting with them.
51
posted on
04/04/2004 2:33:45 PM PDT
by
bayourod
(We can depend on Scary Kerry's imaginary foreign leaders to protect us from terrorists.)
To: bayourod; All
I'm having a discussion with someone that asserts that during her closed door meeting with the committee the WH requested Condi only appear before senior members and did not testify under oath.
Is there a link with info that I can use to debunk this?
52
posted on
04/04/2004 2:52:12 PM PDT
by
kanawa
(Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one.)
To: bayourod
"I wouldn't want to be one of the 10 members who didn't bother to attend her closed door meeting with them." LOL!
Condoleeza Rice: "Senator Nimrod, I have a two part response to your question. First - if you really cared about Naional Security and the War on Terror you would have been here when I testified the first time. Second - if you HAD been here, you would know the answer to the dumbass question you just asked."
53
posted on
04/04/2004 3:33:44 PM PDT
by
Enterprise
("Do you know who I am?")
To: Enterprise
10 book contracts are about to become worthless. It was a Saturday afternoon as I recall. All ten were probably at the same resort hotel with the same bimbos. Perhaps a weekend golf retreat paid for by Soros.
Of course this commission will tell us where the WMDs discovered in 1998 are now. If they don't know, they better not bet my life that they don't still exist and could be in the hands of terrorists.
54
posted on
04/04/2004 3:42:36 PM PDT
by
bayourod
(We can depend on Scary Kerry's imaginary foreign leaders to protect us from terrorists.)
To: bayourod
Without going into extensive detail, a lot of people have talked of the existence of WMDs as fact. This list includes Clinton, Kerry, officials of the United Nations, and Saddam Hussein himself. They did exist, and if they aren't found, we will ultimately learn what happened to them.
55
posted on
04/04/2004 3:50:33 PM PDT
by
Enterprise
("Do you know who I am?")
To: americanbychoice2
Less than 8 months. He became POTUS around 1/20.
56
posted on
04/04/2004 5:50:33 PM PDT
by
expatpat
To: Spotsy
I like to believe that the WH is treating this like a chess-match, evaluating the opponent's possible moves several moves ahead.
57
posted on
04/04/2004 5:53:22 PM PDT
by
expatpat
To: Political Junkie Too
"Is Condi the problem?"
Yes, "Dr". Rice is the problem-for the ill mannered, desperate, dimwits of the liberal left, that is. She is their worse nightmare, come true, and a dream come true for everyone in America who wants the cream of the crop, serving in government and offering input for those decisions that America's very survival rests upon.
The more people see of Dr. Rice, the more impressed they become. I am truly looking forward to her appearance before the 911 Committee as I am sure are most everyone else. If the committee's desire is,"just the facts,Maam" -the lady will deliver. Probably to the everlasting sorrow of those craving to spin the wise and proper response by a great leader and his able advisers to a suprise and murderous assault upon this nation into some kind of cheap farce.
Condileesa Rice for President 2008.
58
posted on
04/04/2004 6:43:53 PM PDT
by
F.J. Mitchell
(Like Freedom, Freerepublic isn't free, but to monthly donors it almost seems to be. Try it and see.)
To: VRWC For Truth
Excellent summation!
mc
59
posted on
04/04/2004 8:14:46 PM PDT
by
mcshot
(Over da bridge member of the Henry Bowman Society)
I must admit that I am not sure where I heard it this weekend, but I thought it was a great line.
It went something like this:
The commission is frothing at the mouth to get their hands on Condi. But remember the last time a panel was frothing at the mouth to get an NSC member in front of them? They wanted to lynch a Marine Lt Col. And remember how that turned out.
Personally, I think they have them right where they want them:
Clarke has been discredited.
Condi can take them on, in public, without editing.
She will tear them apart because she can be both charming and cutting at the same time.
She is loyal to the end. And so is Bush.
She ain't going down. She will come out of this the pre-functory nominee in '08--and there will be an onslaught from the right and the center to oust the VP in favor of her.
She will be their secret weapon if Kerry picks McCain. A Black Woman Veep trumps a turncoat old fool every day of the week. I can feel tightness in Dicks chest as I type.
60
posted on
04/04/2004 8:24:01 PM PDT
by
Vermont Lt
(I am not from Vermont. I lived there for four years and that was enough.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson