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.

[sirthomasthemore]

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

---

No Vigilance, I don't want to be presumptuous. That's why I'm asking you, the source. We're having a discussion, and I'm merely trying to ascertain your view. Since your main objection seems to be that she's not pro-life, I respectfully ask if she changed that view to your satisfaction, would that alter your view as to her viability as President.

You need not answer, if you prefer not to. I simply seek information so that you and I can have an informed dialoque.

[EternalVigilance]

It would 'alter my view as to her viability', yes.

Doesn't mean I would vote for her, though.

[savedbygrace]

Ain't gonna happen. Social conservatives will bolt or sit. Either way, if she is the nominee, the Dims will win the WH. Give it up unless that's your goal.

[sirthomasthemore]

I am pro-life. But...
Yeah.

---

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

I have indicated to you by empirical, historical fact that the line of succession favors Condi. My pro-life view has nothing to do with that documented, undisputed history of the nomination process.

Sorry, I don't understand your rejoinder it appears to be a non-sequitur.

[EternalVigilance]

Where you actually stand, I don't know, but having dealt with 'pro-life, but...' Republicans for a very long time, I always go by the dictum that the word 'but' almost always wipes out the words that preceded it in a sentence.

[sirthomasthemore]

I have a relatively informed understanding of the process.

Your reply: Respectully [sic], I don't think you do.

---

Vigliance-

If you would be kind enough to explain why; and please provide authority to substantiate your position as to where my arguments fail.

I'm open-minded, and I'm always willing to expand my knowledge by learning from those wiser than I.

I would enjoy and appreciate your informed opinion. I come to the Board to express my views, but more importantly, I come to be educated by the informed views of others.

[EternalVigilance]

I have indicated to you by empirical, historical fact that the line of succession favors Condi.

None of that matters when you realize that the overwhelming majority of delegates to the GOP national convention are pro-life.

No pro-choicer has any chance of coming anywhere close to the nomination.

For example, in the first in the nation caucus state of Iowa, every delegate signs a pro-life pledge, promising to only support a pro-life nominee for POTUS and VPOTUS, and to keep the Reagan pro-life platform in place.

Every delegate. 100%. Otherwise they aren't elected as a delegate. Period.

That's reality.

[mowkeka]

It'll be hard for me to support a pro-choice candidate. But I'll support her over McCain (since I don't consider him pro-life).

[sirthomasthemore]

“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. “

REPLY: Yes, we at war. And Condi is in the official position that is dealing with that war, including the war on terrorism. That is her biggest asset. Also, constitutionally, she is the 5th in line in succession to the Presidency. This is hardly a “hack”- and certainly, is a far more powerful position than any other current GOP presidential aspirant, other than Cheney.

“When Condi becomes a General in the Armed Forces and leads the nation to victory I'll reconsider.”
REPLY: Your original point was that legislative inexperience inhibited her chances- I provided examples where that was incorrect. Listing several Generals. In addition, Jefferson, Adams, et.al were not Generals, nor had they held any elected office of which I am aware. Therefore, as to your original point that legislative experience or prior elected office is a prerequisite to the Presidency, is factually invalid.


“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... If you can see the individual's silhouette, he or she is viable. Condi is enveloped in darkness.”

REPLY: Enveloped in darkness? She is Secretary of State. Right now the most powerful female in the world. She speaks authoritatively on American policy on a daily basis. These are not “white papers’; her pronouncements are official American policy.

Discipe, if you don’t want to vote for her, that’s fine. To suggest that she’s not qualified in view of her present position as third in the GWB administraion (GWB, Cheney, Rice) , demeans her unreasonably, and I don’t believe is meritorious.

[sirthomasthemore]

She [Laura]has not changed her position.

---

I'm disappointed to hear that.

[sirthomasthemore]

None of that matters when you realize that the overwhelming majority of delegates to the GOP national convention are pro-life

---

The national convention doesn't nominate; the majority are constrained by the results of their State primaries and caucuses.

That's reality.

[EternalVigilance]

The national convention doesn't nominate; the majority are constrained by the results of their State primaries and caucuses.

Sorry. But you don't win Republican primaries and caucus' if you're pro-choice.

[Reagan Disciple]

"In addition, Jefferson, Adams, et.al were not Generals, nor had they held any elected office of which I am aware."

These were founding Fathers! They built the foundation on which the most important chair sits! You would compare their paths to greatness to a provost, wannbe NFL commissioner who parrots Bush's policies simply because they share the common ground of not holding elected office prior to being elected president? You lost me right here.

You can support her if you like, but I can't see how anyone who believes in and promotes the vision and values of Reagan could support her. Good luck in Iowa.

[sirthomasthemore]

These were founding Fathers! They built the foundation on which the most important chair sits! You would compare their paths to greatness to a provost, wannbe NFL commissioner who parrots Bush's policies simply because they share the common ground of not holding elected office prior to being elected president? You lost me right here.

---

Disciple, your points lose their objectivity every time you use invective against Dr. Rice, our Secretary of State. By referring to her as a "hack", a wannbe[sic] Commissioner, someone obscured in "darkness"- you only lead one to the ineluctable conclusion that you just don't like her-
Now that's fine. But it adds little to an objective analysis of her chances to be President.

As for your comment about the founding fathers and generals, you still beg the question. Your original point was that someone without legislative experience cannot be a viable presidential candidate, and based on the examples cited- that's manifestly erroneous.

[sirthomasthemore]

Sorry. But you don't win Republican primaries and caucus' if you're pro-choice.

---

Eternal,

One must wait until Dr. Rice decides if she's a candidate, what her affirmative positions will be, and who runs in opposition.

If she runs, I think she wins. I know you think otherwise, that's fine. Time will tell.

[Reagan Disciple]

You are promoting SoS like it's a natural spring board to the presidency. Condi is Bush's mouthpiece. She's not doing or saying anything that Bush isn't telling her to do or say.

I understand that she's an intelligent woman with an enormous amount of expertise in foreign affairs. That alone does not grant her the GOP nomination. Does she have any experience with tax policy? Social programs? Crime? Welfare? Spending policy? Budgets? No on all counts.

Simply being "the most powerful woman" or five steps away from the presidency means that Albright is just as qualified to be president.

Jefferson and Adams had legislative experience in that they wrote the historical documents that this country was founded upon. Rice has done nothing in that order for you to even put her name in the same sentence with theirs.

She was a good NSA and may be a great SoS, but she's a private citizen in 2008.

[EternalVigilance]

One must wait until Dr. Rice decides if she's a candidate, what her affirmative positions will be, and who runs in opposition.

She has said repeatedly that she has no intention of running.

What part of NO don't y'all understand?

And why are you, a self-identified pro-lifer, giving any impetus to the mythical nomination of a pro-abort anyhow?

[sirthomasthemore]

You are promoting SoS like it's a natural spring board to the presidency. Condi is Bush's mouthpiece. She's not doing or saying anything that Bush isn't telling her to do or say.

---

Disciple, you make my point as articulated in Post 22. Although I disagree, accepting for argument that she is "Bush's mouthpiece", then GWB may well advance her as his successor. As a practical matter, that means she has in place the political machinery devised and honed by Rove over the last 2 elections, a machine which is far superior than any other GOP hopeful can hope to assemble.

IF GWB is grooming her as his replacement, and if she wants to run, and most importantly, if the economy and world order is in good stead in 2007-2008, she will win.

[Reagan Disciple]

I get it that she's got an "in" at the White House, but Bush is not consulting her on tax policy, social security, judical moninations, the budget, medicare, faith-based policy....see where I'm going? She has no experience in any of these areas. Do you want your next president to learn on the fly?

Do you think Bush is going to rest his legacy promoting Condi to succeed him when she has no experience leading anything?

We will still be in Iraq in 2007-2008 and Iran and China will certainly be issues by then. Even if she wants it, she's not getting past Iowa because of these and the life issue.

But I'll say this, you're persistent.

[sirthomasthemore]

She has said repeatedly that she has no intention of running

---

If she doesn't, our discussion is moot.

Listening to her on Larry King, I formed a view that she might consider running.

If the Bush's want to maintain their control on the GOP, they may be comfortable with her as his successor and pave the way for her.

As for my prolife stand vis a vis Condi's current stand, as I said, I'll wait for her to state her position if and when she runs. If she maintains a pro-choice position, I will not support her.

It's my view, that she'll modify her view and take a pro-life stance. I believe she will appoint strict constructionists. I believe she will bring faith based Black Americans into the party, and thereby, destroy one of the pillars of the socialist base.

As I said, time will tell. But instead of castigating her, I think conservatives should see her potential as promoting our agenda in a manner not seen since Reagan.
I support her based on this potential. If and when the time comes, she demonstrates the tendencies of a RINO as opposed to a conservative, then I won't support her. But, her recent defense of the 2nd Amendment, makes me think that she understands what her platform should be.