Announcement: Americans For Rice.com

Americans For Dr. Rice ^ | May 24, 2005 | Section9

[section9]

In light of this story that appeared in the Washington Whispers column of U.S. News and World Report:

Rice Wants It--But in Draft Form

Political associates of Secretary of State Condi Rice are stirring the 2008 presidential pot on her behalf. While she takes the high road, they're pushing her name out there. "She definitely wants to be president," said one. But, the friend added, Rice isn't planning on quitting to run. "She wants to be drafted," he said.

our organization, Americans for Dr. Rice, would like to announce that it is our organizational intention to place Dr. Rice's name on the ballot in as many states as possible, as early as possible.

[mtntop3]

As for abortion, I'll wait to hear specifically what she (Condi) says.

Amen.

My impression is that she is eminently pro-life but enough of a realist to know that abortion cannot be ended by edict.

[sirthomasthemore]

Top3-

IMO, Condi’s changes hinge solely on:

1 How she and the Bush Administration handle foreign affairs; and therefore, the global condition as of 2007;

2. If GWB wants her to follow him; i.e. she will be the beneficiary of a well honed political machine that has won two presidential elections in a row.

3. That the economy is well enough that the DEMS can’t run again on the theme- “it’s the economy, stupid.”

If those conditions are met, she will run on the same politically conservative platform that she has been a part of since the Reagan Administration.

Who in the GOP can beat her; Frist, Allen, McCain- forget it- She will be like teflon, they won't even touch her. By the time they get an inkling on how to deal with her, she'll have the nomination sewn up.

Laura Bush was once pro-choice; she saw the light. Condi will also.

[raccoonradio]

I like rice pilaf, myself.

Oh, and Condi :)

[EternalVigilance]

Laura Bush was once pro-choice; she saw the light. Condi will also.

Laura Bush is still 'pro-choice'.

[EternalVigilance]

Who in the GOP can beat her; Frist, Allen, McCain- forget it- She will be like teflon, they won't even touch her. By the time they get an inkling on how to deal with her, she'll have the nomination sewn up.

You obviously have little understanding of the GOP nominating process. Pro-lifers dominate it.

[EternalVigilance]

My impression is that she is eminently pro-life...

Funny, when she calls herself 'pro-choice'.

[EternalVigilance]

I second your comments.

[jla]

When asked her opinion of Condoleezza Rice running for President, Hillary Clinton gave her eager approval to the idea

[Reagan Disciple]

Republicans in general and Conservatives in particular should not be looking to vote for someone who's smarter or speaks better then Hillary or who doesn't have a questionable past.

Condi has no meaningful public record, no legislative experience at all, she's a globalist at heart and she's all over the map on abortion.

She was a good NSA and maybe a better SoS. But as far as leading the most powerful nation on the planet, parroting Bush's policies (something Powell refused to do) or serving as provost does not mean she's presidential material.

If defeating Hillary with some pipe dream that she'll cut into the black vote and steal some women is your only reason to promote her, then be prepared for president Clinton II.

[sirthomasthemore]

Eternal Vigilance suggests:
“You obviously have little understanding of the GOP nominating process. Pro-lifers dominate it.”

I reply with respect, my friend, I have a relatively informed understanding of the process. With the GOP, ( as well as Dems), after a two (2) term presidency, the incumbent vice president is considered the titular head of the party, and invariably receives the nomination for the succeding presidential election. In this case, it does not appear that VP Cheney will run. By default, Dr. Rice would be the prospective nominee from the prior administration, if as I mentioned in a post above, GWB wants her to be.

I am pro-life. But that issue is not going to disturb the long standing empirical fact of presidential succession outlined above.

Frankly however, Eternal, it seems that you are just anti-Rice- which is your right. You may favor another nominee. That's fine. But, your opinions might have more resonance if they demonstrated a more extensive analysis of the process, as opposed to merely the abortion issue, which is not yet set in stone as to Condi.

Can we presume that if Condi came straight out and said "I am pro-life and will actively seek to overturn Roe", that you would vote for her?

Reagan Disciple writes:
“Republicans in general and Conservatives in particular should not be looking to vote for someone who's smarter or speaks better then Hillary or who doesn't have a questionable past. “

I respectfully ask, Why not? If Hillary’s the nominee.

Disciple continues:
“Condi has no meaningful public record, no legislative experience at all.”

I respectfully reply, neither did most of our original Presidents, nor Grant, Jackson, or Ike-

Condi has eight (8) years of experience within the innermost circles of the Executive Branch- which would seem to be a far more valued prerequisite to an Executive nomination than running a State or being party to the "legislative" deals we have just witnessed in our corrupt Senate.

In my view, Condi's lack of association with the Legislature is to her advantage, as against those who come to the presidential primaries with extensive legislative records to defend.

[EternalVigilance]

Where is your proof that Laura Bush is suddenly pro-life?

[EternalVigilance]

Can we presume that if Condi came straight out and said "I am pro-life and will actively seek to overturn Roe", that you would vote for her?

If you wanted to be presumptious.

[EternalVigilance]

I am pro-life. But...

Yeah.

[Zechariah11]

I like Condi's personal qualities but have no idea where she stands on the social/domestic issues. What kinds of judges would she appoint? Would she be as reliiable a conservative as Allen or Santorum?

[EternalVigilance]

I have a relatively informed understanding of the process.

Respectully, I don't think you do.

[Reagan Disciple]

"I respectfully ask, Why not? If Hillary’s the nominee."

I respectfully reply because we are at war. The national elections are no longer a struggle for party dominance, but for the strength and safety of America. Eight years for working in the tunnels of the NSA and with the hacks at State isn't enough of a resume to lead the nation against the current war on terror or against an increasingly aggressive China.

"I respectfully reply, neither did most of our original Presidents, nor Grant, Jackson, or Ike"

When Condi becomes a General in the Armed Forces and leads the nation to victory I'll reconsider.

"In my view, Condi's lack of association with the Legislature is to her advantage, as against those who come to the presidential primaries with extensive legislative records to defend."

Under this premise any yahoo who worked at State or wrote a few white papers on the Cold War should get the party nod for the most powerful position on earth.

I always view candidates through the shadow of Reagan. If you can see the indivdual's silhouette, he or she is viable. Condi is enveloped in darkness.

[EternalVigilance]

S-9, you know that I like Ms. Rice as a person, and appreciate her talents and gifts and how she has used them in the service of our country.

You also know that I oppose her for any elective office primarily because of her pro-choice position.

I, and many like me, will not support a pro-choice candidate under any circumstances. Period.


But I have another bone to pick with your favorite political figure: i.e. the Administration's current willingness to negotiate with Abu Mazen, who was a terrorist associate of Arafat for fifty years.

He was the chief financier of the '72 slaughter of the Israeli Olympic team, is a Holocaust-denier, and his propaganda organs are still spewing murderous racist hatred and incitement to kill Jews and Americans.

What the Administration and Sharon are doing to the Israelis right now would not be countenanced anywhere else in the world.

The rock-solid principles that the President stated so eloquently vis a vis terrorists, and those who support them, are being violated in the worst possible way.

[cyborg]

bump!

[sirthomasthemore]

Where is your proof that Laura Bush is suddenly pro-life?

Vigilance, I have no proof. I read it on the Board. I was surprised to hear that she was pro-choice- I think I read that she changed her view in one of those threads re:
Correspondent's Dinner.

I'm relying on the word of whomever posted that, but frankly, I don't know.

[EternalVigilance]

She has not changed her position.