Today on Blogcritics
Home » Rice Remains Poised Despite Dem Idiocies

Rice Remains Poised Despite Dem Idiocies

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I think it’s safe to say that congress is littered with colorful characters… On both sides of the aisle.

But one can be colorful and still be professional. Could someone please inform Barbara Boxer and some of her fellow Democrats of this fact?

The grilling faced by Dr. Rice these past two days underscores exactly why retiring Senator Zell Miller has called his party a “National Party No More.” And it was more than just the fact that Senators like Boxer and Kerry were asking inane questions and saying one thing, then another. While some Dems were questioning Dr. Rice, others were talking in the background. If you were watching on C-Span, you could hear their incessant chatter.

Interestingly, on her show today, Laura Ingraham played some of the background comments and tried to isolate their voices. At one particular spot, you could actually hear one of the Dems, Laura thinks it was Biden, talk about “delaying confirmation.” Now, whether Biden was saying this was a good idea or a bad one is anyone’s guess, but the very fact you could hear Democrats talking strategy on national television while another of their member was busy grilling Dr. Rice is just so completely unprofessional.

And the most pitiful thing of all is the fact that Democrats are only using Dr. Rice as a way of getting face time on television so they can take cheap swipes at the Bush Administration. If these were private hearings, they would have lasted half a day at best.

So, in a real sense, Angry Dems were using Dr. Rice, a person eminently qualified to assume the post of Secretary of State, in the cheapest way. I wonder if they realize how disorganized, angry, and unprofessional they looked to so many of us watching them on C-Span. Truly, my fellow college students who served with me on Student Government served with more professionalism and dignity than some of these pitiful partisan Dems.

In contrast, Dr. Rice looked as if she had already assumed the post of SecState and was smoothly dealing with a group of squabbling third-world government officials. After watching how skillfully and professionally Dr. Rice handled herself during the past two days, I think Americans can feel very confident regarding her ability to handle delicate and critical negotiations for the President and I’m willing to bet that post-hearing polls will reflect that confidence.

And here is the final irony from this two-day Democratic debacle:

In an unpleasant exchange yesterday, Boxer confronted Rice with the usual Angry Left line, that BUSH LIED!!!! about Iraq. But it turns out Boxer is the one taking liberties with the truth:

    Rice: It wasn’t just weapons of mass destruction. He was also a place— his territory was a place where terrorists were welcomed, where he paid suicide bombers to bomb Israel, where he had used Scuds against Israel in the past.

    And so we knew what his intentions were in the region; where he had attacked his neighbors before and, in fact, tried to annex Kuwait; where we had gone to war against him twice in the past. It was the total picture, Senator, not just weapons of mass destruction, that caused us to decide that, post-September 11th, it was finally time to deal with Saddam Hussein.

    Boxer: Well, you should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not, but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. That was the reason and the causation for that, you know, particular vote.

Presumably when Boxer says “I did not,” she means that she didn’t vote to liberate Iraq, not that she didn’t read the resolution. But the resolution itself makes clear that Rice was right:

    Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait; . . .

    The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to–

    (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

    (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

Ignorance is actually the more charitable explanation for Boxer’s misrepresentation of the resolution’s contents. If in fact she did read it, her own integrity is a matter of question.

And here’s another apparent Boxer falsehood:

    You never even mention indirectly the 1,366 American troops that have died. . . . And 25 percent of those dead are from my home state.

According to Casualties.org, the number of California servicemen who’ve died is 157, which is about 11.5% of the total, less than half the proportion Boxer claimed.

I love the irony. Barbara Boxer sat there blatantly accusing Dr. Rice of lying while she herself was playing fast and loose with the truth.

Senator Boxer, “you can’t handle the truth!

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

Powered by

About David

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    So you prove my theory that Rice and the Shrub administration can claim they aren’t liars because they aren’t aware they are liars is true.

    So, Flannelman, I thought the most part of the codes of honor real conservatives swear to is accountability, so who is accountable.

    It wasn’t Boxer who has sent US troops to their death in a sovereign nation which posed no threat to the USA.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Jim:

    If you think that Iraq was not a threat to us or anyone else, then you’ve been living in a shell. Saddam spent 12 years constantly violating the terms of his surrender agreement, he murdered tens of thousands of his own people every year he remained in power, he plotted the restoration of all his weapons programs, he skimmed approximately 20 billion dollars from the UN “Oil For Food” program and used the money to bribe foreign officials, his military fired constantly upon US planes tasked with enforcing UN sanctions, Saddam called for a national celebration in honor of 9/11 and had a huge painting commissioned with himself standing next to the twin towers as they burned with a smile on his face. Saddam funded Palestinian terror and threatened terror attacks here in the US… Shall I go on? It’s a very long list.

    It’s not quite as simple as you seem to think Jim. And liberals accuse President Bush of being too black and white in his view of the world.

    Thanks,

    David

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    No. please go on, I would like to see a longer list. Of course, if you would care to sprinkle a few facts how this poised to threat to anyone in the USA, that would be … ah, what’s the use, you’ve got nothing but lies, torture and murder. You do nothing but evil, and you don’t even know it. You are a stain on humanity.

    I sincerely hope really bad things happen to you in proportion to the poison you spread on the ‘net. Unless you repent. And I’d still spit on you.

  • http://www.bigtimepatriot.com Big Time Patriot

    Hmmm, let’s check Rice’s record, National Security Advisor during time that the Nations Security was violated by the largest terrorist attack on American Soil. Also National Security Advisor when bad intelligence was fed to President resulting in his lying to the American Public leading to 1300 American Soldiers Deaths (Republicans sure love to Support The Troops!)

    And now Rice is promoted. There sure is some idiocy going on, but the Democrats aren’t the party involved in it…

    But I forget, Republican values these days don’t include those liberal buzz words, “accountability” or “responsibility”…

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    You forgot Condi’s favourite bedside reading “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Within the United States”.

    Of course, as it has turned out, all you need for Death to America is Rice and the Shrub administration.

    Y’know, if I was drinking ‘muurican beer, and you spontaneously burst into flames, I wouldn’t even piss on you, that’s how little regard I have for your campaign of evil.

    So for the record, Flannelman — on fire — wouldn’t even piss on him.

    How many other people can get in that line? Can I get a “Hell Yeah!”

  • http://www.outragedmoderates.org Thad Anderson

    “Boxer confronted Rice with the usual Angry Left line, that BUSH LIED!!!! about Iraq.”

    That’s because the Bush administration has repeatedly lied about or exaggerated various aspects of the Iraq situation. Cheney’s continued insistence on an Iraq-al Qaeda link, even after the 9/11 Commission Report’s release, is the most blatant example.

    Here’s a quick run-down of how Cheney lied about the Iraq-Al Qaeda link:

    After the 9/11 Commission’s statement that there was “no credible evidence” of an Al Qaeda-Iraq link, Vice President Cheney told the CNBC network that there was “overwhelming” evidence of such a link. Cheney cited the long-discredited allegation that a 9/11 hijacker and an Iraqi official met in Prague in 2000: “We had one report which is a famous report on the Czech intelligence service and we’ve never been able to confirm or to knock it down . . . All we have is that one report from the Czechs.”

    http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2004/06/18/20040618_123202_flash3.htm
    In July 2002, the head of Czech foreign intelligence said any alleged meetings “had not been proven or verified.”
    http://www.praguepost.com/P02/2002/20717/news1.php

    In October 2002, Czech intelligence officials said that they had “no confidence” in the initial report of a meeting: “Quite simply, we think the source for this story may have invented the meeting that he reported. We can find no corroborative evidence for the meeting and the source has real credibility problems.”

    http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20021020-092811-8185r

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Thad, I’m pretty sure that anyone naive enough to believe that there was no link between Al Quaeda and Iraq has already drunken their cool-aid and gone to sit in the corner.

    Those of us who live in the real world are aware that it was Bill Clinton who first officially recognized that Saddam was one of the major sources of funding for Al Quaeda in June of 2001, and the fact that two of the World Trade Center bombers from the first bombing hid out in Iraq, or that Saddam’s scientists and Osama’s money collaborated on a chemical weapons plant in Sudan, or perhaps the dozens of meetings between Osama and representatives of Saddam’s secret police, etc., etc.

    I mean come on. When Abdul Rahman Yasin fled to Iraq after the first WTC attack Saddam put him up in his own home town and paid him a government salary for several years. How much more of a connection do you need? Wait, how about the Al Quaeda training camp at Salman Pak – inside Iraq?

    Ever wondered why certain mid-east countries and their leadership got attacked by terrorists (like Egypt) and others didn’t (like Iraq). Simple. Some funded Osama and some didn’t.

    Dave

  • http://paperfrigate.blogspot.com DrPat

    David, I appreciate this commentary. I appreciate even more the ways in which Democratic congress-critters and their more vocal constituents continue to make clear the hollow nature of their arguments.

    Now if only we can keep Republican congress-critters and their constituents on the more rational plane, the difference between the two will be ever more obvious.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    >>David, I appreciate this commentary. I appreciate even more the ways in which Democratic congress-critters and their more vocal constituents continue to make clear the hollow nature of their arguments.

    Now if only we can keep Republican congress-critters and their constituents on the more rational plane, the difference between the two will be ever more obvious.<<

    Keeping ANY of them rational regardless of party is a lot to hope for. At best we can hope for a choice between the goofy but harmless and the earnest and ineffectual.

    Dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com alienboy

    If any of the arguments put forward for invasion were genuine and sincere, there would be a long list of countries ripe for conquest and restructuring.

    That fact alone makes it very difficult to accept the arguments put forward for the Afghani and Iraqi “adventures”.

    How about it folks, let’s make a real axis of evil list, based on standardused criteria…

    On another note, this thread is a wonderful spontaneous proof that all politicians are liars. Why do we all get so heavily involved with these self-promoting conmen?

    A posture of cynical hopefulness is the only protection.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    If the criteria for invading a country are at all reasonable then while there would be many other countries on the list, Iraq and Afghanistan still would have been at the top.

    If I were making such a list I’d put human rights issues first, and both the Taliban and Saddam Hussein beat out North Korea in that department. The only place more deserving of invasion that I can think of off hand is Rwanda and that ship has already sailed.

    Dave

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Again I see this bogus argument regarding “no link between Iraq and 9/11.” What the commission reported is that there is little evidence to support that Saddam had any direct link to attacks here in the US on 9/11. The report also said very clearly that Saddam had ties to various terrorist organizations.

    When Saddam stated that he was going to begin paying $25,000 to any family whose son or daughter killed themselves in a suicide bomb attack, what does that tell you? Saddam was clearly friendly with terrorist organizations and meetings between members of al Qaeda and Saddam’s regime have been documented by US and foreign intelligence services.

    David

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    I’d like Condoleezza Rice to explain this to you people in the USAand why she hates your nation so much she’s helped turn it into a terrorist state.

    I hope you are getting paid for this propoganda campaign, Flannelman, because you are a monster if you are doing this voluntarily

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Jim,

    I’d be interested in knowing why the driver of the car refused to stop when Americans order him to. They gave hand signals and then fired warning shots.

    I have two little girls, one of whom is just about the age of the little girl crying in the photo, so this hurts to see as well. I just don’t understand why you pull this picture up for us and say, “It’s all her fault.”

    Does the Bush Administration want US troops to kill civilians, is that what you are saying? This is a war and car bombs have been one of the principle tools used to kill American troops and Iraqi citizens.

    Why don’t you post a link to the picture where one of the terrorists detonated a car in an area where an Iraqi wedding was taking place, killing dozens of mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, uncles and cousins? Why don’t you post a link to the picture of the Iraqi aid worker whose life work was feeding starving families in Iraq but who had her head cut off a couple of months ago?

    Selective perception perhaps?

    David

  • http://www.outragedmoderates.org Thad Anderson

    Call me naive, but I trust the 9/11 Commission report when it says there was no substantial operational relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    The word “operational” means, working together actively to perform acts of terror. Hell, VP Cheney said the same thing in 2003, which ignited a whole firestorm of recriminations, of course, from Democrats. However, the evidence showing Saddam’s support of terrorism in general is beyond question.

    David

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Call me naive, but I trust the 9/11 Commission report when it says there was no substantial operational relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. <<

    What that means is that they concluded that Saddam didn’t hand the 9/11 bombers their box cutters, pat their butts as they boarded a plane to America and kiss them on both cheeks. It does not preclude his providing the money and facilities to train them as terrorists in general and underwrite living expenses and provide other general logistical support to the organization of which they were part. Supporting Al Quaeda and having personal knowledge of what it was doing are not the same thing.

    Dave

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    Flannelman (for you have the moral constitution of dryer lint) at least you fulfill an educational role, showing the world the true, ignorant banality of evil.

    I know for sure now you would hack your neighbors to death with a machete if your local political operative told you to.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    David. Join the rest of us and just ignore Carruthers. He’s completely irrational and dogmatically anti-american. Our soldiers could give toys to Iraqi children and he’d complain we were trying to acculturate them and addict them to western commercialism. He probably blames the World Trade Center for killing the terrorists aboard the 9/11 planes.

    Dave

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    I hope you get cancer and suffer a long slow death you evil fuck.

    Anyone catch that last sentence by Jim in #18? He put it in white text so it would be hard to read.

    Jim, WTF?

  • Eric Olsen

    that was quite beyond the pale

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    I thought it was known as having “poise” in the face of partisan attacks. After all, it’s only the consequences of policy, it’s not in my name, right?

    And if that ignorant evil fuck and the rest of his tribe don’t get cancer, and die a slow, horrid death, well, then, I guess I lose the sick game they are playing.

  • http://ccsmusicman@yahoo.com blue state values

    Doesn’t Laura (“Wack Job”) Ingraham also believe that L. Ron Hubbard is God? And, if so, why would any sane person ever listen to her? I, for one, enjoyed watching Boxer smack down Condi. I guess it’s the accountability thing that Repug-licans don’t seem to get.

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    Maybe Eric can explain how a harsh statement, which was hidden so you actively had to find it is “beyond the pale”, but isn’t.

    <img src=”http://www.resonation.ca/images/blogcritics/15905993.jpg” alt=””>

    If I could make that hateful little man realize his family is like this as an object lesson, I would. And I would have as much regret as Condi does. This is being done in your name. And you signed off on it. And I have nothing but contempt for those of you who have done nothing to stop it.

  • http://www.templestark.com/blog Temple Stark

    Why don’t you post a link to the picture where one of the terrorists detonated a car in an area where an Iraqi wedding was taking place, killing dozens of mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, uncles and cousins?

    This is disinformation David. The US owned up to this one. (Unless this happened twice)

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    If it makes you feel any better, I’ve changed my mind.

    I hope Flannelman dies quickly and quietly.

    While getting raped in prison. On pay-per-view on Fox News. While Condi Rice cheers.

  • Eric Olsen

    political “outrage” does not justify this kind of sentiment. Opposing a war does not mean that those who do not oppose it, or even those who conduct it, are evil subhumans deserving of cancer and involuntary prison sex. It seems to me that only a paroxysm of solipcism could make it seem so. Just because we believe it, really really hard, does not mean we own the water rights to truth.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com andy marsh

    that cold canadian air really makes some people quite edgy!

  • http://www.thebmrant.com Matt Egan

    David–assuming you’re still reading this after all of the tripe that Mr. Carruthers is spewing. Isn’t all of this confirmation stuff all in the name of politics? Do you think the Republicans wouldn’t be grilling an equally qualified Kerry choice if the shoe was on the other foot? It seems like when Republicans are in power, they expect detractors to genuflect and go on their merry way. And how dare we ask the beloved “Condi” some questions before her guaranteed confirmation is made official. It seems like you guys are a tad sensitive. Biden etc can’t help but do this shit, and your guys are no different.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Matt,

    Calling Dr. Rice a liar is not asking her questions. Accusing the Bush Administration of murder and incompetence is not part of the confirmation process.

    The Democrats talking to Dr. Rice openly admitted they expected to see her confirmed. Indeed, the political price would be far too high NOT to confirm her. They simply decided to use those hearings to give Dr. Rice a hard time and to hopefully damage the Bush Administration.

    Now, if you would like to give me an example of a Democratic President who nominated someone for a cabinet post and that person was treated as poorly as Dr. Rice was treated, I would love to hear about them.

    Thanks,

    David

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Doesn’t Laura (“Wack Job”) Ingraham also believe that L. Ron Hubbard is God? < <

    No, she's an outspoken Catholic. Where did you get that strange idea from?

    >>that cold canadian air really makes some people quite edgy!< <

    I think it's really the sense of powerless and disconnection from having any impact on world affairs that makes them so frustrated.

    >>Calling Dr. Rice a liar is not asking her questions. Accusing the Bush Administration of murder and incompetence is not part of the confirmation process.<<

    Boxer and Biden and the others are just grandstanding for their constituencies. After asking Rice some offensive and rather stupid questions on the first day Biden admitted in an interview after the hearings that he was planning to vote for her. It’s all hypocrisy.

    Dave

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    Imagine how frustrated Condi must feel, after years of trying to interpret subtle clues as to what what happening in the Kremlin, to have the good ol’ USA streamline the process, making public the power-struggles in the ruling party.

    So, at least the rest of the world gets to see how thuggish and brutal the ‘murrican empire really is.

    I hope you all choke on it.

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    As an added note, isn’t it interesting that Flannelman objects to the administration being asked about incompetence, murder, torture, and so on.

    So, he, like most of the people in the USA don’t object to the practice, just being called to account.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Jim:

    I’m sorry, did you say something?

    David

  • http://www.thebmrant.com Matt Egan

    David, It may be difficult to find a Dem nominee that the Republican had enough on to really grill them the way Condi has been grilled. Perhaps in the next presidency we’ll get a chance to invade a few countrys and give the Reps some ammo for their confirmations hearings.

    BTW–Carruthers makes Noam Chomsky sound like Hannity.

  • Eric Olsen

    I have a cool motto for Condi: “Invade, then evade”

    but I kid – I think she rules, other than the dental gap

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com/ andy marsh

    What it is with that anyway? It seemed to work for Lauren Hutton?

  • Eric Olsen

    and for Alfred P. Neuman

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Matt,

    Clinton attacked his fair share of countries. Off the top of my head he attacked and/or invaded these nations: Haiti, Iraq, Somalia, and Kosovo.

    Am I missing any here?

    The point being that people like to paint the Bush Administration as overly aggressive and warlike, but President Clinton, the Viet Nam protester, flexed America’s muscles when he had to. The difference then is that some hyper-partisan Democrats wanted to use Dr. Rice confirmation hearings as a platform for their agenda. They wanted to score cheap, worthless points against the Bush Administration and get as much face time on national TV as possible.

    It was thoughtless, unprofessional, and exactly the kind of thing that will hurt the DNC even more than it has already been hurt.

    Thanks,

    David