Senate Confirms Rice As Secretary of State (85-13)

AP on Yahoo ^ | 1/26/05 | Barry Schweid - AP

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON - Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) won easy confirmation Wednesday to be President Bush (news - web sites)'s new secretary of state, despite strong dissent from a small group of Democrats who said she shares blame for mistakes and war deaths in Iraq (news - web sites).

The Senate voted 85 to 13 to confirm Rice, who succeeds Colin Powell (news - web sites) as America's top diplomat and becomes the first black woman to hold the job.

Plans were made for her to be sworn in at the White House Wednesday night, take her place in the State Department Thursday morning and have a more elaborate swearing-in by Bush at the agency on Friday.

The Senate vote showed some of the partisanship that delayed Rice's confirmation vote by several days. Twelve Democrats and independent James Jeffords (news - web sites) of Vermont voted against Rice. The Democrats included some of the Senate's best-known members such as Massachusetts Democratic Sens. Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry (news - web sites), who was the party's presidential candidate in last year's election. Thirty Democrats voted for her.

Democratic foes of her appointment focused mostly on the way Bush and Rice took the United States to war in Iraq and how they have handled the war with insurgents since deposing Saddam Hussein (news - web sites).

They said mistakes had led to mounting American casualties. As the debate drew to a close, word came from Iraq of the crash of a U.S. military transport helicopter in bad weather, killing at least 30 people in the worst U.S. loss since the war.

Rice's nomination was never in doubt, however. Republicans had hoped to hold the vote last week, on the same day that Bush took the oath for his second term, but Democrats asked for more time. The GOP accused Democrats of inappropriately delaying Rice's confirmation to make political statements about Iraq policy.

Rice, 50, is Bush's trusted national security aide and a main architect of his policies on Iraq and the war on terror.

Although Rice was assured of confirmation, she got the most "no" votes since World War II. Seven senators voted against Henry Kissinger and six each against Dean Acheson and Alexander Haig.

"Dr. Rice is an honorable, fine public servant who needs to be confirmed," Bush said during a news conference Wednesday. "She will be a great secretary of state and Dr. Rice and I look forward to moving forward."

Bush rejected claims by Democrats that they had been lied to in the run-up to the war in Iraq.

On the Senate floor Wednesday, Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., suggested Democrats are sore losers. Rice had enough votes to win confirmation, as even her Democratic critics acknowledge, McCain said.

"So I wonder why we are starting this new Congress with a protracted debate about a foregone conclusion," McCain said. Since Rice is qualified for the job, he said, "I can only conclude that we are doing this for no other reason than because of lingering bitterness over the outcome of the election."

What had seemed at the outset to be a cinch turned into sometimes angry debate over Bush's decision to go to war with Iraq, his struggle with a potent insurgency and Rice's role in helping him make a case for overthrowing Saddam.

An academic who specialized in the study of the now-defunct Soviet Union, she has been one of Bush's closest advisers as his national security adviser for four years. In testimony last week to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, she swore she has not been shy about disagreeing with him privately at times.

Now, she will be at his side trying to improve relations with European allies, pursuing a Middle East settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, seeking a way to stop North Korea (news - web sites) and Iran from developing nuclear weapons — and, above all, trying to pacify Iraq with limited additional U.S. casualties.

[bill1952]

Well... You better find a cheap raincoat, because "GRaham" has been cuddlin up to HITLERY of late,

Yep. What everyone on this Forum should realize is that an elected Florida Democratic official on the State or National level are about as rare as teeth on a hen.

There is only one Federal officeholder from Florida, and he's probably toast in 06, even though he has moved so far to the center that the Nation wouldn't even recognize him as a dem.

Graham is of that ilk, but now that he is history, look for him to move back to the left of Hillary.

The fun part of this story is the total control the Republicans have at the state level, and the interesting coincidence 8^) of low taxes, (no income tax) homesteaded property tax,(low) great infrastructure, and jobs (right to work state) everywhere.

And the Dems actually believed that Florida was in play.
Goes to show just who in this country was really drinking the kool aid.

[ORECON]

well what i'm saying is that the negative always gets the spotlight...I can't remember the link but McCain votes ovr 80% or so with the Repubs but gets the spotlight on issues that show him on the Dem side. The press is lib so they like to show McCain in their light and not the total light

Sorry, I do not like or trust John McCain. IMHO whatever he does is for himself and never for public service.

[Seadog Bytes]

BUMP!

[bill1952]

Am I the only one to notice the YES vote by Hillary?

[SierraWasp]

I wasn't talkin 'bout that FL Democrat, Graham... I was talkin 'bout that Lindsey Graham (see reply #55) who was one of the Clinton Impeachment Managers when he was in the house, before he lost his cotton picken mind and became a Senator.

He was a McCain worshipper back when Dubya was tryin to win the primary election, as was our idiot Secretary of State here in CA, Bill Jones!!! Now, the new Senator Graham has been suckin up to Hitlery so badly that some on here have speculated she'd leave Bill and he'd leave his wife and they'd make politics and babies together!!!

Now there's no doubt Dubya's been a RINO about some things IMO, but these bizzare things that Senators McCain, Graham and the joker out here that didn't even try to unseat Boxer and endorsed McCain against Bush... Are INSANE RINO's, in my not-so-humble opinion!!!

Oh! And Arnold's not much of a squared-away Repub, neither!!! Neither is Rudy!!! (who I still admire to a great degree, anyway because he campaigned for Bill Simon out here)

[NorCalRepub]

yeah but what i"m against is people who throw out the "RINO " term for just one vote or a one disagreement. I know which Graham you were talking about and he sided one time against something "Republican" it seems and all of a sudden he is a RINO.......I'll agree that Spector, Snowe, Chaffee and Collins are RINO's and the Progressive Path results show that but some here start throwing that term around like a new play toy....like Hagle...who bad mouthed part of the war but voted 92.63% with Repubs or even McCain who voted 80% with pubs.....hey I understand where you are coming from but when you start labeling everyone like that is seems hysterical and what a Dem would do.....not a strategic thinking conservative

[bill1952]

Ah.

politics and babies together!!!

Hillary is too old for babies. Thank God. 8^)

I could not agree with you more about Rudy and Arnold.

[spodefly]

This vote against Rice by Evan Bayh is unexpected. It only makes sense if he is keeping his options open for a POTUS bid in '08.

I would think that vote would not help him in the least with regard to any aspirations he has in '08.

[persecutor]

I've lost a lot of respect for the man over the years, and don't consider him a reliable ally of the President or this Administration. He fancies himself a rebel after reading the MSM's portrayals of his "honesty" during the 2000 primaries.
Guess they "forgot" the Keating 5 and all his other transgressions so they could gin up an interesting primary season to cover.

[persecutor]

Bayh wants to project the "moderate" Hoosier to the electorate, and as such, doesn't go in for flamethrowing like some of his more "visible" colleagues.
He thinks that this image will win in 2008 and seeing PIAPS run towards the center only proves that Bayh is on to something.
It'll be fun watching the hopefuls from the left try and out Pubbie the real Pubbies.

[Seadog Bytes]

RE: "I missed Vietnam by 1 1/2 years so I will never ever lecture on that one..........it was so divisive I'm not surprised that it made strange bedfellows"

(I didn't miss it.) ...IMHO Vietnam was divisive BECAUSE of people like Kerry.

I seriously suspect that I am stating the obvious, and/or 'preaching to the choir here, but...
Certainly Kerry was playing the same game with Vietnam ('peace' movement) as Gore was more recently playing with the environment (and 'global warming'.) It's NOT that EITHER of these men so very much BELIEVED, or were so COMMITTED to those causes, it's that they both saw the opportunity for political advantage with those issues and, being the opportunists they both are, they tried to use those issues to gain power.

Kerry's self-serving actions damaged America's ability to conduct, and win, that war then, and he has been doing the same sort of thing with Iraq, for the same reason. The jury is still out on how much Gore damaged the country with HIS opportunism, but both men are exceedingly dangerous because they will do, or say anything, as long as they perceive it will further their own ability to grasp political power.

With his background, McCain ought to KNOW better (about Kerry) but, as someone else on this thread aptly observed, and I am paraphrasing here, he DOES like the spotlight, and his contrarian, inexplicable positions, on a number of different issues DO always get him that.

McCain is dangerous because it can certainly be argued that not even HE knows 'who he is'. ...Whether you can call him a 'RINO' or not, *I* would certainly never trust him with the rudder until/unless he had 'treatment' for his (that) condition... and probably not even then.

[NorCalRepub]

I agree on Kerry but no one really knew him in Vietnam so he didn't have as much to do with it's downfall as you know as the media, mainly Walter and the inept Kennedy and Johnson admin trying to run the war politically.....my other assertion is such that sometimes this RINO stuff gets out of hand....i don't care if you don't like McCain cause you have that right, but given the deifintion of RINO, almost every Repub can be called that at any given time fi he disagreed......it is just thrown around so much that it deosn't mean much anymore........

[SierraWasp]

Well... I may not stack up to your ideal in conservative strategery, but by gum I'ma considerate conservative. Part of that involves considering the cause and effect of a person's truth or consequences surrounding the shooting off of their big mouth!!!

Simply put... Is the person helping the cause of conservatism, or hurting it? After I consider that, than I consider if it's helping the party that is the lessor of two evils, then I conjure up my considered opinion which is considerably more considerate than any RINO has ever been to those fellow citizens who want the sovereign USA to turn out well!!!

So consider this... I was even unhappy with Ronauldus Magnus, the "Great Communicator," who promised to do three things... Balance the budget, beat Communism and bring peace on Earth! Well... This Considerate Conservative considers two out of three, ain't bad even if he blew the budget thang!!!

These other twerps can't even get their accomplishments for conservatism up to one out of three, let alone two!!!

[Barlowmaker]

Oh! And Arnold's not much of a squared-away Repub, neither!!! Neither is Rudy!!! (who I still admire to a great degree, anyway because he campaigned for Bill Simon out here)

Yep, the only authentic Republicans and true conservatives are anonymous people posting to an internet forum.

[NorCalRepub]

but everyone is a RINO then.......I just don't like that term thrown around like it means anything anymore...what Republican or conservative meets your standards of being a true conservative Republican.........everyone has their individual quirks or disagreements......you can by all means believe in what you want but I can also believe that not toting the party line all the time makes one a "RINO". Toteing party lines all the times IMO means on is not thinking entirely for oneself

[SierraWasp]

The Party has a platform with adamant statements of positions, right? So people who espouse frequent and unmitigated opposition to the most major of those positions would not normally be identified with said adamant platform position statements, right?

What the heck is so hard to understand about that???

Hey Barlow... You trollin for trouble again??? I sure hope I'm not gonna have trouble with you, again!!! (well actually you weren't really that difficult, come to think of it)

[Barlowmaker]

LOL. Get over yourself. How's that conservancy coming along?

[SierraWasp]

The CONservacancy... Well... I just can't seem to git over it!!!

You certainly have been absolutely no help whatsoever!!!

"Oh Lord it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way!!!"

[SierraWasp]

Oh! And by the way... That CONservancy was created by a phony CONservative Gubernator!!!

[Barlowmaker]

I find it amusing to juxtapose your bluster in post 165 with the fact that you seem to turn to FR as a crying towel when you get your butt handed to you on a political platter. It's all about being better than the RINOs, above the Party, transcending the system until you get steamrolled politically. Then, it's about crying and victimization.