Condi kicks butt

Gooberman · Post by **Gooberman** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 9:22 am

With this one, people will just support whoever is on their side. Clarke also did very well, even if you don't agree, their was a drop in the presidents polls right afterwards. I didn't see a homerun, but I am biased

There is a historical degree of, almost humor, that all the republicans are supporting the Black women, and all the democrats are supporting the White male. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find the republicans receive an unprecedented amount of "Black votes," in this election. The dems came down hard on her when she wouldn't testify, that may hurt them since she is probably the most successful African American female in politics.

I know the catch phrase is "Clarke has a book to sell," well, Rice has a job to keep

bash · Post by **bash** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:49 am

Weak, Goob.

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:50 am

I also watched her with my baby, but that's a by the way.

At one point she was talking about the illigality of the CIA and the FBI sharing information pre-9/11 security amendments. Why? Why arn't, or weren't they allowed to talk to each other.

FC

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:52 am

Well, theoretically the CIA is foreign affairs and the FBI is domestic affairs.

Gooberman · Post by **Gooberman** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:59 am

Make an argument Bash

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:14 am

Let's see,

Sen. Bob Kerry demands Rice testify publically so Rice testifies and when she trys to answer his political statement disguised as a question he shouts her down and says her response can wait until private session!

No, not a political circus, he was just trying to get her to testify in public so they can get answers to help us all /sarcasm

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:20 am

Is there anything she would have been asked by anyone that wasnt political? Any question right Will? As long as it was asked by a Dem is was politically motivated??

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:24 am

It is supposed to be a commision to find answers to the intelligence failures. It doesn't sound like one to me...more like a campaign debate.
Just read the text of Richard Ben-Veniste's 'questions' and tell me what his motives were. Particularly the one regarding the context of a memo that his assertions were flatly rebuked so he re-phrased it like: "But it's still consistant with the context of the assertion.." or something like that.
Pure prosecutorial badgering and morphing the question so as to create the only possible answer to lead the jury to the conclusion he wants them to reach, in spite of the obvious, clear answer that was given which contradicts his spin.

You tell me, who does he serve with that line of questioning?

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 12:10 pm

I saw that on TV a short while ago, Will. Something was up, it almost seemed like he was asking the question purely for the sake of the people watching (trying to bombard her, or something), then he tried very hard to push her past it. I think she did well in insisting on giving an answer.

*edit* - I believe he was trying, purposefully, to maneuver her into a position of being on the defensive.. it's difficult for me to put my finger on it/ put it into words.

TheCops · Post by **TheCops** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 12:52 pm

ya, i noticed that too guys.
it's weird because all throughout american history televised congressional inquiries have always been real fair and there is never any grand standing.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 2:40 pm

That's probably so, but we should expect better from government officials.

UZI · Post by **UZI** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 2:42 pm

Bush let her do the thing because he doesn't want her as damaged goods when he picks her for VP later this year (after Kerry saddles his pick).

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 4:28 pm

"At one point she was talking about the illigality of the CIA and the FBI sharing information pre-9/11 security amendments. Why? Why arn't, or weren't they allowed to talk to each other."

FC, there was a seperation between FBI and CIA for public peace of mind (prior to 9/11). FBI is a law enforcement agency dealing mainly with interstate crime. CIA ia a spy organization and as such the american populace didn't want it to have anything to do with operations within america's borders. So for obvious reasons both entities had seperate mandates and saw no reason to share information. Hope this helps you to understand a little bit more.
Now as to the above scenario, it has amazed me during the whole comission hearings, questioning was directed at pres. Bush's admin. as to why they didn't take steps to get all the info being gathered by various agencies and piece it togeather so as to prevent 9/11. Why did no one ask why the Clinton admin. (of which Clarke was part of) didn't mandate the FBI, CIA and INS to work togeather and share information knowing full well Clinton was aware of AQ and bin laden were responsible for prior terrorist attacks?

it's weird because all throughout american history televised congressional inquiries have always been real fair and there is never any grand standing.

Cops, this was not a congressional hearing...it was a commission hearing and thus political posturing is unseemly

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 6:07 pm

He's being sarcastic

And bash, you are the Rican of the right, buddy.

Bold Deceiver · Post by **Bold Deceiver** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 7:53 pm

UZI wrote:Bush let her do the thing because he doesn't want her as damaged goods when he picks her for VP later this year (after Kerry saddles his pick).

Always thinking ahead, Uzi. Hey think of this -- Kerry anoints Hilary Clinton his running mate for V.P., and Bush selects Condi .... Mmmmmmmmm.... I'm drooling just imagining the Vice-Presidential debate.

By the way, I think there is a better than even chance that Dr. Rice will be our President in 2008.

BD

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:23 pm

Hah! I doubt that the extreme right would let Condolezza Rice get anywhere near a Republican Presidential candidate nomination. Maybe Powell, but certainly not Rice.

Bold Deceiver · Post by **Bold Deceiver** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:39 pm

DCrazy wrote:Hah! I doubt that the extreme right would let Condolezza Rice get anywhere near a Republican Presidential candidate nomination. Maybe Powell, but certainly not Rice.

The extreme right. lol.

Say it with me -- "President Rice". See, that's not so hard?

I love that this conversation will be memorialized. See you in 2008, amigo.

BD

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:45 pm

Cheers woody, that makes it a bit clearer.

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 6:32 am

I guess what I get tired of, and I do it to so I'm not exempt, is that we don't even talk about what she said. The only thing we discuss is what party said what, and it all of our extensive political knowledge, what they actually meant.

TheCops · Post by **TheCops** » Sun Apr 18, 2004 9:21 am

i just finished watching her on fox news sunday.

she was very not a politician. maybe i'm a sucker but condi does kick butt. what a positive, and rational force... she makes her boss look like me.

Kyouryuu · Post by **Kyouryuu** » Sun Apr 18, 2004 10:17 am

UZI wrote:Bush let her do the thing because he doesn't want her as damaged goods when he picks her for VP later this year (after Kerry saddles his pick).

I was under the impression Bush was already running under the Bush-Cheney ticket. At least, that's what the early promotional materials have advertised. I thought it was perhaps a bit surprising that Bush would continue to associate himself with Cheney, given his heart condition and the whole Halliburton ordeal. He definitely fits the mold of the stereotypical "rich white guy." On the other hand, if Bush chose Rice, that would definitely be something interesting and perhaps advance our political system into the 20th century.

Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it would be a little bit creepy with Cheney in charge.