<p>In the mendacity tradition…</p>
<p>I don’t tend to vote for wives of mass killers of children.</p>
<p>I think brilliant, educated, well-spoken, diplomatic but takes no crap, are good enough reasons for me to vote for Condi. We’ve put peanut farmers, actors, and daddy’s boys (many) in the White House for years…why not a Phi Beta Kappa who was a former Stanford Provost with a specialty in international affairs and foreign policy, two decades of service to former presidents, three books on foreign policy and multiple honors under her belt?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html[/url]”>http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html</a></p>
<p>Not to mention the fact she’s overcome horrid racism and aspects of poverty; yet, she does not wear this on her sleeve like a victim’s Pity Poor Me badge. This requires discipline and a certain ‘can do’ attitude I find very appealing. Six years as provost of Stanford is testament enough of her managerial skills.</p>
<p>She’s conservative, but for common sense reasons, for example - she really thinks the Second Amendment is designed for folks like her and her parents, who armed themselves against violent racist attacks while living in Alabama. Not because some lawyer from a special-interest group sent her a flyer in the mail. As I recall, one of her friends was killed by a bomb in Birimingham planted by KKK types, for example.</p>
<p>With her, I don’t see a black American woman who’s amazing. I see an amazing American woman who, by the way, just happens to be of African descent. This I would suggest is the way Dr. Martin Luther King wanted it to be - judge her by the content of her character, not by the color of her skin. Further, as far as I know, there’s no hint of the character questions with Miss Rice that follow Mrs. Clinton. Clearly, though, the Clintons have been under the microscope and Condi has not…as much, yet.</p>
<p>I would offer she’s a wonderful example of the American dream - at it’s best. I have to say, even as a Southern-born and bred white male, I am proud - for her to represent me as the Secretary of these United States and would be prouder still of her as the President of the United States. (Besides, I heard that Maggie Thatcher was not eligible to be a U.S. President. This is still a rumor, I think :))</p>
<p>Finally, she’s from the South. Everybody knows Yankees just can’t get elected as President.</p>
<p>took me, what, nearly 15 seconds to figure out what “POTUS” stood for. Maybe it was CGM’s post that included the word “president” that unlocked the acronym, with a jarring thump, in my glacial brain. Anyway, no thanks.</p>
<p>Sorry.</p>
<p>POTUS = President Of The United States</p>
<p>and in an earlier post of mine:</p>
<p>SCOTUS = Supreme Court Of The United States</p>
<p>Much as I’d love to be able to vote for a woman president, my greater wish is for someone who will protect this country and say to h*** with the polls. </p>
<p>That definitely leaves Hillary out. As for Condi, she’s not been much more impressive.</p>
<p>We need someone like Reagan again . . . And if you would prefer a woman, someone like Maggie Thatcher, “the Iron Lady” comes to mind.</p>
<p>I think that they are both admirable women, tremendously hard workers, and both would be better than what we have now. That being said, I am not aware that Condoleeza Rice had to overcome poverty. I thought that her parents were solidly middle class, but haven’t checked my facts recently. I also think that both would be far more resistant to influence-peddling, and political scheming, than any of the men I have heard mentioned for President in either party. My preference off the top of my head would be Hillary but I would have to see more of both before I made up my mind.</p>
<p>Why would you prefer Hillary, patient? When I ask anyone what’s she has accomplished, no one can give me a good answer, other than generalities.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h2044.html[/url]”>http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h2044.html</a></p>
<p>I am curious why you would single me out when several posters above also voiced their support for Hillary. I believe that she is brilliant, more liberal than Condoleeza, more committed to social justice and protection of the poor, more articulate. But I don’t like being singled out like that. Why not ask all of those who indicated support for her? Why I hate political threads…</p>
<p>I’m sorry, patient . . . I wasn’t picking on you, yours were just the last post I read!</p>
<p>I really hope I didn’t offend you, patient. I was simply asking a question I’ve posed to many others - not to pick on you in particular. </p>
<p>I’m not a fan of either Hillary or Condi, by the way.</p>
<p>How can anyone even consider voting (potentially) for Hillary? </p>
<p>What the H— has she ever done except “stand by her man” — man in the loose sense of the word. She is a joke compared to Condi, who has real experience in national politics and foreign policy.</p>
<p>Both are intelligent, well-educated women but I’d have to echo an earlier post which wondered what Ms. Rice’s own opinions and views would be if she weren’t towing the company line. There’s also the never having held an elected office issue for her. She did not “overcome poverty”, not sure where anyone got that idea. She is from a solidly middle class background. I think that HRC’s views on issues are well-known and she is an incredibly hard worker. I admire her life-long advocacy for children’s rights and related issues. On another note, having seen both of them speak, in person, HRC is definitely the better public speaker. I think it’s interesting that both women have switched political party allegiances over the years. In a dream world, it would be interesting to see them running against each other, with perhaps Barack Obama as HRC’s running mate, and, hmmm, not sure who would be a good match for Ms. Rice.</p>
<p>Lastly, someone mentioned that they were from different generations but, if I’m not mistaken, they are only six or seven years apart in age.</p>
<p>To be honest, HRC scares me. She is a radical leftist, who has not disavowed her extremist views on children’s “rights;” her super-secret meetings with her clan during her socialist health care debacle; her strong-armed tactics with the White House travel office and Filegate; her willingness to cover up for Bill, which should raise the eyebrows of feminists everywhere; how her ethnic jokes are given a pass by the media’ her carpet-bagging in NY state. No, she’s not someone I admire, and definitely not a person to whom I would entrust the safety and security of the United States. </p>
<p>And for the record, Condi has been a huge disappointment as secretary of state. I’ve found her to be much too wishy-washy, in an era that cries for strong leadership.</p>
<p>To quote Sam Rayburn when asked about JFK’s advisors, the gentleman from Texas said: “I wish that at least one of them would have run for sheriff…” or words to that effect.</p>
<p>Dr. Rice has never run for political office. She need to go back to California and consider running for the U.S. in 2012. By then, Dianne Feinstein should be ready to retire.</p>
<p>My bet is that Dr. Rice will take the money and run. She will join a couple of corporate boards, write a few books, give some speeches, become a talking head on television. The money will be too good to refuse.</p>
<p>Remember Richard Nixon’s dismal run as a candidate for governor of California back in 1962. He wanted to talk about big national issues; California voters wanted to know about highways and college campuses and prisions and such.</p>
<p>BTW, while HRC isnt my first choice as a presidential candidate, even my GOP friends in New York give her high marks as a U.S. Senator.</p>
<p>Depends on who she’s running against: if the choice is Dick Cheney or Ann Coulter, then Yes. In most cases, No.</p>
<p>Vote for the lesser of two weevils.</p>
<p>By observation, I don’t think she’s terribly real-world smart or people-smart, as opposed to book-smart. In my lingo, I don’t think she can hit a curve ball.<br>
I also don’t care for her temperament.</p>
<p>Brandon’s mom–not a problem. I just should know better by now than to even think of posting in these threads. I can’t take the heat! But before I join Digmedia’s pledge group…</p>
<p>TheDad–which one of the two are you talking about now? I assume Condi?</p>
<p>I have gathered from some of the things she said in hearings that she was a fairly strong supporter of Gonzales’ view of torture. I have also thought that while Hillary espouses the view that “it takes a village to raise a child”–with which I agree–Condi would say something along the likes of “The child can raise him or herself without any help from society”–at least that is the way she strikes me–she is not a fan of social justice programs, feeling that it is up to the individual to fend for him or herself. I have always thought that point of view ignores the fact that not everyone has the gifts that CR and for that matter HC have, and that we need to be more compassionate and helpful as a society toward those who have been, for a number of reasons, less fortunate. E.g., the disabled, the elderly, the disenfranchised and weak of all sorts. I don’t think we would see that under a CR; I do believe that we would see that under HRC, also McCain.</p>
<p>HRC: Absolutely not, never ever.</p>
<p>Condi Rice: I would love to see her in a position to run, but do not think she would. If she did, however, I probably would vote for her.</p>
<p>Don’t we need a change? Someone honest, and bright, please.
I can hardly think of one who hasn’t deceived us, enriched their
relatives or themselves. These are difficult times. A great leader
must emerge.</p>
<p>The test for a woman used to be would she push the button if she had to. Hillary would - at least if the target was Republican.</p>
<p>Assume Hillary would govern like Bill but without the personal pecadillos - perjury and the like.</p>
<p>We have a balanced budget, good economy, good defense, liberal on social issues. Bill’s pecadillos for entertainment.</p>
<p>It’s a good 8 years!</p>