Condoleezza Rice for VP with Romney?

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

On the plus side, if she ran with Romney she wouldn't have to give it up. She'd really only have to take a six month sabbatical and then she could go back to academics.

I don't think she wants to run the risk that, by some fluke, he might win. And then die. She has zero interest in being POTUS, apparently.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by BigAppleBucky

She would be a strong choice. Romney's foreign policy chops need shoring up and very few Republicans outside of Rice have as good a reputation. (Colin Powell excepted)

Colin Powell's foreign-policy reputation is disgraceful. in case you've forgotten.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Don't be ridiculous; of course he was. if she ever decide to run they would call her a house nigger and a lesbian and a crook and anything else they can think of. SOP for the tolerant left.

Regards,
Shodan

I wasn't. Which is the kindest thing to be said about the above.

[gamerunknown]

Looking at her positions on the issues, there are some progressive and some worrying factors. Her support for civil unions wouldn't be meaningful as a VP for Romney. Her stance on turning the Arab Spring into something positive may be reminiscent of Operation Gladio. She supports renewable energy sources, but advocates cutting spending rather than increasing taxes (which probably unfortunately translates into social programs rather than offence). She supports an extension of NAFTA but has a corresponding sane position on immigration: less deportation (subsidised goods stifling the ability of Mexicans to compete and then their being unable to go to the centre of wealth production is plainly damaging).

Her biggest detractions are on foreign policy and homeland security in my view, where she is in concordance with Bush. She claims that bin Laden's death vindicated the use of torture and that increased surveillance is worth the additional safety. She also supports attacking Iran if they develop a nuclear weapon.

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Don't be ridiculous; of course he was. if she ever decide to run they would call her a house nigger and a lesbian and a crook and anything else they can think of. SOP for the tolerant left.

Regards,
Shodan

You can't actually believe that.

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Marley23

it is definitely true that Romney just took a lot of flack for hiring an openly gay spokesman (and the spokesman quickly resigned after being pushed into the background).

For being gay, not for all the juvenile women-bashing tweets and other statements he'd been making. That shit didn't do it (and Romney may not even have thought there was anything wrong about it), being who he was born to be did it.

[Ethilrist]

Originally Posted by Cheryl44

They tried a token woman last time and the women didn't vote for the ticket. So they'll pick a male Latino this time and see if they can get the Latino vote.

They should have picked one who didn't make Michelle Bachmann look like a calm, clear-headed elder stateswoman.

[Bryan Ekers]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

You can't actually believe that.

He will actually maintain steadfastly that he does, I figure.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers

He will actually maintain steadfastly that he does, I figure.

Indeed--it's pretty much exhibit A for my claim that Republicans desperately want a beard. Shodan is using her as a beard in the hypothetical, declaring hypothetical Democrats willing to slur her in order to show how awful they are and to deflect attention from the real question, which is whether I'm right or Marley is re: Republican attitudes toward a gay candidate.

To forestall the obvious, I think Democrats are too chickenshit, and also too hampered by homophobia (although to a much lesser degree), to nominate a gay candidate.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness

To forestall the obvious, I think Democrats are too chickenshit, and also too hampered by homophobia (although to a much lesser degree), to nominate a gay candidate.

To nominate an openly gay candidate. There was James Buchanan.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Don't be ridiculous; of course he was. if she ever decide to run they would call her a house nigger and a lesbian and a crook and anything else they can think of. SOP for the tolerant left.

You are wrong, of course. Karl Rove works for your side in the excessively partisan battles in which you engage.

[waterj2]

Incidentally, why exactly does Condi have such a great reputation? During her tenure as National Security Advisor, the US slept on intelligence that Al Qaeda was planning an attack and started a war over nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. Was she in any way responsible for anything that wasn't actually a colossal fuck up?

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

You can't actually believe that.

Of course he can. And if you challenge him on the point, he'll find some obscure leftie blog that did say those things ten years ago and claim that's proof that "the left" is racist.

And if you point out how many racist signs and t-shirts are visible at a Tea Party rally, he'll turn around and tell you all those racists don't represent the movement as a whole.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

And if you point out how many racist signs and t-shirts are visible at a Tea Party rally, he'll turn around and tell you all those racists don't represent the movement as a whole.

Yeh, one gets a lot of that.

[TonySinclair]

Originally Posted by waterj2

Incidentally, why exactly does Condi have such a great reputation? During her tenure as National Security Advisor, the US slept on intelligence that Al Qaeda was planning an attack and started a war over nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. Was she in any way responsible for anything that wasn't actually a colossal fuck up?

"On the day the World Trade Center and Pentagon were attacked, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice reportedly was set to declare that the biggest threat to America was long-range missiles, not terrorism.

"In a speech that was never delivered, Rice failed even to mention Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden or Islamic extremist groups, former U.S. officials told The Washington Post.

"News of the scrapped speech appears to bolster charges by former counterterrorism boss Richard Clarke that the White House downgraded the importance of terrorism before Sept. 11, 2001, and was more interested in Iraq and the agenda of the previous Bush administration."

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2004...sm-white-house

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness

Indeed--it's pretty much exhibit A for my claim that Republicans desperately want a beard. Shodan is using her as a beard in the hypothetical, declaring hypothetical Democrats willing to slur her in order to show how awful they are and to deflect attention from the real question, which is whether I'm right or Marley is re: Republican attitudes toward a gay candidate.

It's not hypothetical; it's right there. If she's a lesbian (there is no evidence of this) and the GOP hated lesbians, then why would she be as popular a choice for VP?

Originally Posted by tomndebb

You are wrong, of course.

No, I'm not. Rice has already been characterized as a house nigger and an Aunt Jemina and all the rest of it. I know you like to pretend that reality is other than you like, especially on matters of race, but that doesn't change anything.

Rice is a non-Democratic black; therefore, to the left she is a nigger.

Regards,
Shodan

[fumster]

Originally Posted by Shodan

It's not hypothetical; it's right there. If she's a lesbian (there is no evidence of this) and the GOP hated lesbians, then why would she be as popular a choice for VP?

No, I'm not. Rice has already been characterized as a house nigger and an Aunt Jemina and all the rest of it. I know you like to pretend that reality is other than you like, especially on matters of race, but that doesn't change anything.

Rice is a non-Democratic black; therefore, to the left she is a nigger.

Regards,
Shodan

You left off the "s"

[a35362]

Originally Posted by Captain Amazing

...The Republicans got burned with Sarah Palin last time, partly because they focused on trying to pick a game changing, "interesting" candidate that would shake stuff up for the McCain campaign. So I think the message is going to be this year, "Look, you had four years of 'celebrity' Obama, and look what happened. But now the adults are in the room. We're boring, but we know how to create jobs and get government off your back."

Well, in fairness, they didn't really know what they were getting with Sarah Palin. She turned out to be a whole lot more interesting than they really wanted.

[Bryan Ekers]

I really wanted to like Palin, I admit, until she started talking and that rapidly became impossible.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness

Indeed--it's pretty much exhibit A for my claim that Republicans desperately want a beard.

Only Republicans who think being seen as anti-gay is a bad thing, though. I don't think that's a majority, let alone enough to get a candidate nominated.

To forestall the obvious, I think Democrats are too chickenshit, and also too hampered by homophobia (although to a much lesser degree), to nominate a gay candidate.

The lack of candidates is also a problem. Openly gay politicians are becoming more prominent, but they need to work their way up the ladder. It may take a while for an openly gay candidate to get to a position of enough prominence to really get into this discussion, and by then even more people will find themselves comfortable with the idea.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Shodan

It's not hypothetical; it's right there. If she's a lesbian (there is no evidence of this) and the GOP hated lesbians, then why would she be as popular a choice for VP?

What makes you think she is popular as a choice for VP? This is just an idea pundits and messageboarders are batting around.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Originally Posted by Shodan

It's not hypothetical; it's right there. If she's a lesbian (there is no evidence of this) and the GOP hated lesbians, then why would she be as popular a choice for VP?

Do you understand what I mean by "beard"?

Rice is a non-Democratic black; therefore, to the left she is a nigger.

Do you want to qualify "the left" a little more? If not--if we go by your usual all-pervasive ideas about the left--then I invite you to show her being called such a name by:

The Washington Post
The New York Times
Any federally-elected Democrat
CNN
MSNBC
Anyone else who may remotely be characterized as a member of the mainstream left.

If instead you'd like to qualify your "the left" to mean "the lunatic hateful fringe of the left," then I'll concede the point and suggest that such qualifications would better appear in the original claim.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by fumster

You left off the "s"

Condoleezza Rice is a non-Democratic sblack?

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by aceplace57

I can't think of anyone with better credentials for VP. She's so well respected and would be a huge asset for Romney. Condi was the only positive thing I ever saw in the Bush administration.

The big question is... Can they pry her out of Stanford? Is she rested and ready to get back in the fray?




http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...tcmp=obnetwork

I don't see how reminding people of George W. Bush helps a Republican win an election. They've been spending the last 4 years pretending that George bush wasn't REALLY a Republican.

[Jas09]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

I don't see how reminding people of George W. Bush helps a Republican win an election. They've been spending the last 4 years pretending that George bush wasn't REALLY a Republican.

Hell, they've spent the last 4 years pretending George W. Bush wasn't REALLY president...

Is there a single policy issue on which Mitt Romney diverges from GWB? Maybe immigration reform? Although it doesn't even really seem like he's fully committed to his anti-immigration stance (Which, why would he be? Cheap labor!).

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness

If instead you'd like to qualify your "the left" to mean "the lunatic hateful fringe of the left," then I'll concede the point and suggest that such qualifications would better appear in the original claim.

First, he would have to admit the left includes anything else. I don't know if that's emotionally possible for Shodan.

[Northern Piper]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

They've been spending the last 4 years pretending that George bush wasn't REALLY a Republican.

Yeah, wasn't he really a Whig or something?

[emcee2k]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Talking about her appearance is dumb. BrainGlutton wasn't calling her a lesbian as a taunt, though...

Still, he called her a lesbian. Which isn't really an insult, but also doesn't have any basis in fact, either. He clarified some in his next post, but it's still a little disappointing to see "She's a lesbian." as the first sentence to the first reply in the thread.

[Marley23]

Granted. Whatever her personal life is like, her connections to Bush are enough to keep her from getting nominated and I see no reason to think Romney would even consider her because I don't think she addresses any areas he needs to shore up. I also don't think she's interested. This is just idle speculation by Juan Williams.

[Captain Amazing]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Talking about her appearance is dumb. BrainGlutton wasn't calling her a lesbian as a taunt, though; he was saying she wouldn't be offered the position because she's a lesbian.

It's discouraging that he'd jump to that, though. There's no evidence that she is one other than the assumption that so often is made that a woman in a position of power, especially an unmarried one, is a lesbian.

[BigT]

She also already said she wasn't interested. It was on either The Daily Show or Colbert.

[Measure for Measure]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Rice is a non-Democratic black; therefore, to the left she is a nigger.

Regards,
Shodan

So if Democrats are bigots, why is it that you are the only one in this thread using ethnic slurs? Your argument seems rich to me.

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Measure for Measure

So if Democrats are bigots, why is it that you are the only one in this thread using ethnic slurs? Your argument seems rich to me.

It's one of those "I'm only doing this to show you how bad these people really are in secret even though they haven't done any of this stuff (yet!)" arguments.

See also: "all Muslims are terrorists who want to kill you, even the nice ones living in the suburbs in Wisconsin" and "all atheists hate God and want to destroy Christianity" and "all gays want to rape you and molest your children and marry your dog" and so on and so forth.

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

Originally Posted by Measure for Measure

So if Democrats are bigots, why is it that you are the only one in this thread using ethnic slurs? Your argument seems rich to me.

Don't you understand that word is NOT hate speech, but only if you're black yourself or a conservative accusing liberals of thinking it?

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Captain Amazing

It's discouraging that he'd jump to that, though. There's no evidence that she is one other than the assumption that so often is made that a woman in a position of power, especially an unmarried one, is a lesbian.

There's a bit more than that. But only her own party officially favors punishing her for it.

[Captain Amazing]

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves

There's a bit more than that. But only her own party officially favors punishing her for it.

First of all, that's Michelangelo Signorile. He outs everyone. Secondly, I don't see that the Republicans favor punishing her for anything.

[Tristan]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Don't be ridiculous; of course he was. if she ever decide to run they would call her a house nigger and a lesbian and a crook and anything else they can think of. SOP for the tolerant left.

Regards,
Shodan

Cite?

[TonySinclair]

Originally Posted by Tristan

Cite?

Rush said it, he believes it, and that settles it.

[Tristan]

Originally Posted by TonySinclair

Rush said it, he believes it, and that settles it.

You are probably right. That whole "Tolerant Left" dig is right out of Rush's playbook.

[Snickers]

Originally Posted by Cheryl44

They tried a token woman last time and the women didn't vote for the ticket. So they'll pick a male Latino this time and see if they can get the Latino vote.

Please. I'm tired of politicos thinking of people as monolithic voting blocks. Palin definitely was courted and chosen because of her gender, but McCain and his handlers forgot that women don't vote for people based only on what sorts of genitals they're sporting. No way I'm voting for a moronic talking head that seems to hold exactly opposite views to everything I value, regardless of how many vaginas or breasts she has.

Likewise, while there are probably some Latinos that would vote for Rubio based only on his heritage, likely most will evaluate his stances on jobs, immigration, taxation, values, and so on before making their decision. Like everyone else does, even white males.

[Marley23]

Republicans know they're not going to win the Latino vote. They weren't going to win it anyway and the years of hardcore anti-immigration policy have not helped. They're hoping to win a big enough chunk of it to cut into Obama's vote total and win Florida. The magic percentage for them is supposedly 35.

[Frostillicus]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Don't be ridiculous; of course he was. if she ever decide to run they would call her a house nigger and a lesbian and a crook and anything else they can think of. SOP for the tolerant left.

Regards,
Shodan

FYI, our side doesn't care if she's a lesbian. Your side does.

[The Tooth]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Don't be ridiculous; of course he was. if she ever decide to run they would call her a house nigger and a lesbian and a crook and anything else they can think of. SOP for the tolerant left.

Regards,
Shodan

There's a possibility they might bring up her running interference for Bush's policies, like killing thousands of Iraqis for no reason and having people kidnapped and tortured. How intolerant!