Posted on 08/23/2006 12:15:39 PM PDT by no dems
The idea of a woman president is not so abstract now that the 2008 election nears, Lynne Cheney, wife of vice president Dick Cheney said Wednesday.
"If you're thinking of Condi Rice, I think she has good credentials," Cheney said.
During an appearance sponsored by the Aspen Institute, Cheney talked mostly about education and history but did venture into current politics, including the possibility of women running for president. She did not mention New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, widely thought to be considering a presidential run in 2008.
"(National security) is the driving issue," Cheney said. "The stereotype exists that women are softer. Maybe it's not true. I don't think it's true. But it's a little bit of a challenge to overcome for a woman president."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
One, "Condi" is not well liked at present in the Afro-American community, being a female Uncle Tom for Bush...
2, Do you really think the red states are going to vote for a black woman? I know what we know here at FR about Rice, but mainstream America sees a black woman. Not a black woman of stature(definition 2), like we see her...
And 3, case of beer, no bottle....
I want you to acknowledge all three of these, then I'll take the bet... whether you agree or disagree, I need the publicly acknowledge so there are no surprises for you went you're heading to the UPs store... Deal??
Thanks, I almost missed that link
Here here!!
I couldn't find a braille font, it was the best I could do... ;^)
lol...
Cool!!!
. . . "she said things that held off the dread "world opinion," was obviously negotiating like mad with non-Hez friendly Muslim governments behind the scenes, and gave the Israelis every chance they needed. They blew it, or possibly, on the basis of antiquated information, they didn't realize the challenge. In any case, I thought she did the best she could with a bad situation and what turned out to be a less powerful ally than we had thought."
How accurate this article below is I don't know, but I've had it anyway with the Golden Globalist Rice. Land for peace, land for peace. But who would have thought Hamas would win elections. Peace is only won in this world through excessive force, but Dr. Rice can go ahead and continue brokering the middle east into a greater Islamofascist empire if she likes. Egypt will be next on the axis of extremists after concessions to Syria. How can you win over enemies when they can't even get along with each other? It's insanity.
I'd take Tancredo or Weldon in '08, but it'll never happen.
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1204
"A DEBKAfile investigation has uncovered some facts that would help explain some of the mishaps.
The knife-edge threat that caught the Israeli army unprepared was welcomed in Washington. Our sources close to the Bush administration have learned that secretary of state Condoleezza Rice embraced the opening for an Israeli offensive against Hizballah in Lebanon. Vice President Dick Cheney also favored an Israeli air strike but worried about the lack of an Israeli plan for a parallel ground offensive. One of his aides later expressed the view that Olmert and Halutz had been cautioned that air offensives unaccompanied by ground assaults never achieved strategic goals, as the Americans discovered after bombing Baghdad at the start of the Iraq war in 2003.
But the Israeli prime minister and chief of staff insisted that the air force was able to inflict a shock defeat on Hizballah and produce a fast and cheap victory.
US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld was leery about any Israeli military offensive against Hizballah, fearing complications for the US army in Iraq at the peak of a surging sectarian civil war.
But Olmert talked Rice into asking President George W. Bush to back the air offensive. The US president acceded – only laying down two basic conditions: Israel must confine itself to an air campaign; before embarking on a ground offensive, a further American go-ahead would be required. The second was a promise to spare Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure and only go for Hizballah’s positions and installations.
The conditions when relayed by the secretary of state were accepted by the prime minister. The first explains why Israel’s ground forces were held ready in bases for three long weeks rather than being sent into battle - up until the last stage. By then, the air force offensive had proved a long way short of fast and cheap; worse, it had been ineffectual.
The second condition accounts for another of the war’s enigmas: Israeli forces were not allowed to destroy buildings known to be occupied by Hizballah teams firing anti-tank rockets because it would have meant destroying Lebanese infrastructure.
This brought Israeli forces into extreme danger; they were forced to come back again and again to repeat cleansing operations in villages and towns close to the Israeli border, such as Maroun a-Ras, Bint Jubeil and Atia a-Chaab. This exposed them to Hizballah’s attrition tactics at the cost of painful casualties.
Only in the third week of the war, when the Bush administration saw the Israeli air force had failed to bring Hizballah to collapse, and the campaign would have to be salvaged in a hurry, did Rice give the green light for ground troops to go in en masse to try and finish off the Shiite terrorist group. Then too, an American stipulation was imposed: Israel troops must not reach the Litani River.
The Israel army did embark on a tardy wide-scale push to the LItani River and as far as Nabatia and Arnoun, but was soon cut short in its tracks. American spy satellites spotted the advance and Olmert was cautioned by Washington to hold his horses.
This last disastrous order released the welter of conflicting, incomprehensible orders which stirred up the entire chain of command - from the heads of the IDF’s Northern command down to the officers in the field. Operational orders designed to meet tactical combat situations were scrapped in mid-execution and new directives tumbled down the chute from above. Soldiers later complained that in one day, they were jerked into unreasoned actions by four to six contrary instructions.
None of the commanders at any level could explain what was going on because none were party to the backroom decision-making at the prime minister’s office. According to our sources, Olmert kept his exchanges with Condoleezza close to his chest and members of his cabinet and high army command firmly out of the process. The prime minister even kept the chief of staff out of the picture and did not explain why he was called on to chop and change tactics in the heat of war.
Olmert’s absolute compliance with Rice’s directives without fully comprehending their military import threw Israel’s entire war campaign into disorder.
Because of the muddle, supply trucks could not locate units and had to leave them without food and water, the subject of one of the bitterest complaints.
This botched sequence of decisions and their consequences also ties in with the fishing expedition in Damascus subsequently embarked on by senior Israeli ministers.
It appears that Condoleezza Rice was not exactly happy with the way the war turned out, nor with the failure of diplomacy to bring Lebanon’s hostilities to a satisfactory conclusion or even to deploy an effective multinational force to stabilize South Lebanon. She therefore decided to explore the chances of luring Bashar Assad away from the Iranian fold. This is a tentative idea which has not ripened into a policy - much less gained a White House go-ahead. But as soon as word was leaked to Jerusalem, several Israeli ministers jumped aboard – Peretz first, followed by Livni, who there and then created a Syrian Project Desk at the foreign ministry, the education minister, Yuli Tamir and finally, on Monday, Dichter.
These ministers know that the Olmert government stands on shaky legs against the spreading wave of popular disaffection over its management of the Lebanon war, its cost and its outcome. The clamor for a state inquiry is the least of the public’s demands. For government members who are caught between a fragile truce in Lebanon and a tenuous government, any distraction – even a reckless feeler towards a declared enemy – may look attractive."
Although Dubyah has said that he will not endorse a successor, it is clear that Condi is actually an apprentice. I think that she has the credentials , but also may be a bit too academic in the ivory tower sense. Does she have the intestinal fortitude to exercise a nuclear option?
The next president of the US may have to face that demon and conquer it, and for any enemy to think that a president would not push the red button, is problematic. Condi has shown a willingness to negotiate at times , when a gun boat might be better employed. I would feel better about her as a possible candidate if she had served in the military for a few years in her history.
I would vote for her though.I would never vote for McCain or Rudi, who have proven that neither have the necessary character to be a Republican president.
McCains recent conduct in forming a bi-partisan senate collective to undermine the Republican move towards limiting the filibuster caused me to abandon him as a lost cause.He would cut a grossly imperfect deal at any cost rather than fight Islamofascists, the choir is always played to , and he is not a man of steadfast principle.
Giuliani's treatment of his wife and family during his extra-marital episodes with his present spouse also revealed how he would act under pressure, without honor. He hasn't got what it takes to be president during a war on Islamofascism, when his political friends might have lives at risk.
Tom Delay looks better to me than either of these men. He looks better than Condi in my eyes.
Condi isn't going to run. This is all just so much hot air, because there isn't all that much to talk about until the actual primaries get under way.
The ONLY reasons that Condi's name keeps being brought up, is because she a Republican BLACK WOMAN and the specter of Hillary running.
You have to have a FIRE IN YOUR BELLY to run and win; she doesn't and she's NEVER even run for an elected office.
Rudy treated his second wife VERY well; she, OTOH, treated him HORRIBLY,FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS...both in public and in private!
I know from an inside source that Condi will NOT run in 2008 because she would like to pursue academic efforts while she is still young. However, she would be open for a run in 2012 or later. Like fine wine, Condi won't be ready until it's time.
Sorry but NO. She is in over her head period. Besides she is not interested.
My vote is for George Allen. I would love Newt, but I do not think the guy has a snowball chance in you know where to get the nomination.
I really want Newt and would like for him to keep Condi in his Cabinet.
I don't be,ieve condi will even run, never mind get the nod, so I think it's a safe bet.
100% true. Please refrain from posting to FR if you have no idea what you're talking about. Condoleezza Rice's position on abortion is identical to Hillary Clinton's: "Safe, legal & rare."
Neither had Hillary Clinton - yet she won a Senate seat.
Ike swore up and down that he absolutely would not run for President under any circumstances.
Somehow he ended up in the Oval Office.
Even Hillary has said at times she wouldn't run for president.
Condi, we hardly know you. She has never held elective office, demonstrated extraordinary leadership ability, or undergone the scrutiny of the MSM. We have indications that she is pro-choice and for affirmative action. We have no idea what her positions are on taxes, social security reform, gun control, judicial nominations, immigration, etc. Her resume leaves a lot to be desired.
In the 20th century, Hoover and Eisenhower were the two successful candidates who never held elective office before running for the Presidency. However, both had impressive executive credentials running major organizations. The idea that Condi Rice can be considered as a legitimate candidate to run for President as the nominee of one of the two major parties seems incredulous to me. It doesn't speak well of our political system.
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.