Posted on 03/12/2005 4:43:56 PM PST by MadIvan
WASHINGTON is suddenly agog at the prospect of President Condi. A flurry of speculation about the political ambitions of Condoleezza Rice was ignited yesterday when the US secretary of state took a first step towards wooing conservative Republican voters.
Asked in a newspaper interview to comment on widespread speculation that she might stand as the Republican candidate for the White House in 2008, Rice not only declined to rule out a run; she went on to discuss an unusual subject for a secretary of state — the rights and wrongs of abortion.
Rice was careful to avoid any suggestion that she is actively planning a campaign. But Washington pundits seized on her unexpectedly ambivalent responses as evidence that a dream contest is materialising for 2008: Rice v Hillary Clinton, an all-woman battle for the most powerful job in the world.
When the subject was first broached by the Washington Times reporter, Rice replied with a brush-off. “I never wanted to run for anything,” she said. “I have enormous respect for people who do run for office. It’s really hard for me to imagine myself in that role.”
She was pressed on whether she was prepared to repeat the famous denial of General William T Sherman, who said in 1884: “If nominated, I will not run; if elected I will not serve.”
Rice replied with a chuckle: “That’s not fair . . . I really can’t imagine it.”
Had she stopped there, many in Washington might not have paid too much attention. But even though President George W Bush has barely begun his second term, Republicans are painfully aware that he has no obvious successor.
The race has begun for various senators and governors who are already nosing around New Hampshire — the scene of early voting — in the hope of staking a claim to Bush’s majority. The first thing they must do to impress conservative voters is establish their views on abortion.
In a striking departure from her preoccupations with the Middle East and Iran, Rice talked about how she approaches an “extremely difficult moral issue” as “a deeply religious person”.
Rice admitted to being “mildly pro-choice” (in favour of a woman’s right to choose) — a position that for some right-wing voters will disqualify her immediately. But she emphasised that abortion should be “as rare a circumstance as possible”. She also argued that the government should not pay for abortions “because I believe those who hold a strong moral view on the other side should not be forced to fund it”.
Rice insisted that her remarks should not be misinterpreted: “I’m not trying to be elected.” But they are certain to be seized on by an army of admirers who have established websites seeking a Rice candidacy in 2008. “Our lady’s got the buzz,” proclaimed the weblog CondiPundit.
Washington analysts have long been divided over Rice’s chances. Some Republicans argue that she should first return to California and challenge a Democratic senator to gain campaign experience. She had a chance to run for governor two years ago, but yielded to Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Her supporters see her as an American Margaret Thatcher, ready to confound convention and become America’s first woman president. Dick Morris, the former Bill Clinton aide who has become an outspoken critic of Hillary Clinton, recently argued that Rice had become a “Republican rock star . . . her every movement covered by an adoring media”.
Rice took Europe by storm on her recent tour. If she pulls off a breakthrough in the Middle East peace process, Morris argued, a Rice candidacy could destroy the Democratic party’s electoral chances.
Harder-nosed analysts suggest that her political inexperience is too big a drawback, especially when pitted against the masterful manoeuvring of the Clintons.
Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Centre for Politics, said that the two women were in different leagues. Compared with the Clinton steamroller, the Rice candidacy was “cotton candy fluff”, he said.
Yet Rice has one card up her sleeve. She is a close friend of the president, whose endorsement could prove decisive. Bush recently joked that “if I catch her thinking that way (about becoming president), I’m going to remind her that I picked her to be secretary of state”. If she does well he may need to promote her.
Nominating Condi is very likely suicide --- for racial reasons as well as the abortion issue. I think, however, that a semi -pro -abortion candidate could, if need be, couch their position on abortion in purely legal terminology and likewise find success as a republican candidate.
What worries me more is the unlikely prospect that America will elect a black president at this point in time.
I'm not all that confident that the dems would nominate hillary in the end.
Does being mildly pro-choice mean that an aborted baby is mildly dead?
Admitted? All she admitted to is that she's a weanie.
I agree. It is so early in the whole process. To put things in perspective, if this were 2001, there would still be 6 months before 9/11. And that of course became the whole focal point of the first Bush term.
I do believe Clinton would kill for the nomination, and will probably get it.But it is far too early to speculate on the Republican candidate for 2008. Let the term start playing out first, and things will occur. On this basis a candidate(s) will begin to emerge, and we'll have plenty of time to raise Clinton's negatives to unsustainable.
So if Democrats vote for hillary instead of Condi ...wouldnt that make them racists?
Condi wouldn't win one primary and Hillary will never be President.
McCain, McCain, McCain, You're making me break out in hives.
Let's speculate about Rove getting on board with any new candidate.
Calamine for my itch.
Best check in with the Red States. Washington is agog about anything from centerline to extreme left.
No, you've just found yourself amongst a herd of other RINOs...like YOURSELF!
Kick butt and take RINO screen names...
"No, you've just found yourself amongst a herd of other RINOs...like YOURSELF!"
Looks like I caught me a loudmouth [b]ass!
"Kick butt and take RINO screen names..."
At the butt kicking contest you're a one-legged man. Take all the names you like. Put 'em in your secret tin-foil-covered scrapbook.
"Kick butt and take RINO screen names..."
At the butt kicking contest you're a one-legged man. Take all the names you like. Put 'em in your secret tin-foil-covered scrapbook.
If Condi plays a big role in a successful Middle East peace policy/taming Iran/NK, she'll have put to bed that 'never held elective office' worry. Only V.P. Cheney has more stature and experience, but he doesn't want to run.
Nobody 'runs' for VP. The choice of running mate should be up to the presidential candidate.
Neither Taft or Hoover held elective office prior to being elected President.
Considering their records in office, I can't really reccommend future preisidential candidates without having held prior eletive office.
She's never run a family, has she?
If not, then she doesn't have a clue.
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.