WaPo has run an editorial conspiratorially half-baked suggesting that Democratic opposition to Rice’s nomination are racia
lly motivated:
Rice’s nomination, noted the Washington Post, garnered “the most negative votes cast against a nominee for that post in 180 years.” As the Senate debated her nomination, Senator Barbara Boxer charged that Rice “frightened the American people” into supporting the Iraq War; Senator Jim Jeffords accused her of being part of an effort to “distort information” in the service of “political objectives”; and Senator Pat Leahy, who voted in her favor, endorsed her by saying that her tenure as national-security adviser lacked “strong leadership, openness, and sound judgment.”
Oh, snap! Waitaminute…
Oops! That was back in 2004!!! A different Rice! The one we’re talking about isn’t a Republican but a Democrat. Here’s the WaPo editorial:
The oddity of the Republican response to what happened in Benghazi is partly this focus on half-baked conspiracy theories rather than on the real evidence of failures by the State Department, Pentagon and CIA in protecting the Benghazi mission. What’s even stranger is the singling out of Ms. Rice, a Rhodes scholar and seasoned policymaker who, whatever her failings, is no one’s fool.
Could it be, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus are charging, that the signatories of the letter are targeting Ms. Rice because she is an African American woman? The signatories deny that, and we can’t know their hearts. What we do know is that more than 80 of the signatories are white males, and nearly half are from states of the former Confederacy. You’d think that before launching their broadside, members of Congress would have taken care not to propagate any falsehoods of their own.
Get that? Opposition to Susan Rice must be due to race. Forget what even left-wing non-think tank Think Progress notes in regards to Senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham who are high-profile leaders in opposing Susan Rice:
Host Soledad O’Brien challenged Burgess’ opposition to Susan Rice, noting that Republicans had supported Condoleezza Rice’s nomination as Secretary of State in 2005, despite the Bush administration’s role in the massive intelligence failures that led to the Iraq war. Burgess struggled to explain the contradiction. He initially claimed that the media was far more critical of Bush’s intelligence failures than Obama, but when O’Brien laughed away that claim, he told her to take up the question with Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), both of whom supported Condoleezza but now oppose Susan:
If I remember this correctly, Condoleezza Rice’s ethnicity at the time of her nomination was black/”African”-American. Who opposed her nomination back then and who supported her?
The WaPo Editorial Board must have forgotten the opposition to Condoleezza Rice’s confirmation, which was led by former Klansman Robert Byrd and a guy who left a girl to die:
Leading the charge against Rice on Tuesday were Democratic Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Barbara Boxer of California.
Boxer, one of two Democrats to vote against Rice’s nomination in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Rice’s answers to her questions were “completely nonresponsive” and raised more issues about her credibility than they answered.
Rice, Condoleezza, received fewer favorable votes in her Secretary of State confirmation than any nominee in almost 25 years and more negative votes than any nominee in 180 years. Twelve of the thirteen votes against Rice were from White Males, including the aforementioned former Klansman.
Boxer accused Rice of lying about Sadaam Hussein’s WMD program, and Rice pushed back that they relied on the available intelligence, among other things.
This would become a theme in Boxer’s continuously demeaning conduct towards Rice, which included mocking the fact that Rice had no children during the Iraq Surge hearings in January 2007 (note, Boxer also used the term “dark cloud” which, had it been used by a Republican as to a black Democratic nominee, surely would have been called a dog whistle or worse)(full video here):
Of course, WaPo isn’t the only news outlet or liberal pundit pushing forth the race card:
By all accounts, the Democratic Ms. Rice has received far more delicate treatment at the hands of politicians and the media. During an otherwise uneventful stint as ambassador to the United Nations, she is now under fire for attributing the Benghazi attacks to “a hateful and offensive video” on five Sunday morning news programs. In the wake of these comments, Senator John McCain described her as “not being very bright,” and stated that, “if she didn’t know better, she’s not qualified” to be secretary of state. Senator Lindsey Graham noted, “I don’t trust her,” and that “if she didn’t know better, she shouldn’t be the voice of America.”
MSNBC executive and former Newsweek White House correspondent Richard Wolffe spent Monday night parsing the aspects of John McCain’s racial animus. Wolffe seemed even to surprise host Chris Matthews — not exactly shy about identifying racism in the GOP — who asked, incredulously, “You’re saying that McCain is being driven by racial prejudice here?” According to Wolffe, “There is no other way to look at this.”
And when Matthews- who himself has constantly cried racism- points out the inconvenient fact that McCain supported Condi Rice, Wolffe poo-poos it away by claiming McCain’s support of Condi was also due to racism:
McCain’s support for Rice in 2004, he explained, is further evidence of his racism. “John McCain said the people — the Democrats who were questioning Condi Rice’s credential — they were just engaged with bitterness, they needed to move on,” Wolffe said. “Why has he changed his tune? What is it about Susan Rice?” The question, obviously, is rhetorical.
Wolffe is not alone. Ohio congresswoman Marcia Fudge noted sorrowfully, “It is a shame that anytime something goes wrong, they [Republicans] pick on women and minorities.”
Oh, white- er, I mean “right”: Susi (can I call her “Susi”?) Rice is also a woman. Let’s not forget about the GOP War on Women. Oh, wait…wasn’t Condi Rice also, um….a woman?
Must have been anti-woman when President Bush selected Colin Powell as Secretary of State in his first term.
I’m so confused….
South Carolina congressman Jim Clyburn took things a step further, telling CNN on Tuesday that he hears racial “code words” in Republican opposition to Rice’s nomination. Those are words such as “incompetent.” “These kinds of terms that those of us — especially those of us who were grown and raised in the South — we’ve been hearing these little words and phrases all of our lives and we get insulted by them,” Clyburn said.
Anything and everything Republicans and conservatives say are codewords for racism and bigotry.
Who woulda thunk it?
Aren’t we all more troubled by this constant slander and hypocrisy on the part of partisan Democrats?
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
Let’s discuss the merits or demerits of a Susan Rice Sec State…..
1. Remember the genocide in Rwanda during Bill Clinton’s presidency?
Susan Rice was criticized for her part in the decision not to intervene in a serious way to stop that 1994 genocide where more than 500,000 people were killed.
Later Bill Clinton said it was the worst mistake of his presidency.
Gee.
SHE was ALL for how it was treated.
The policy SHE created is the one Bill Clinton followed.
WORST MISTAKE OF THE CLINTON PRESIDENCY WAS FOLLOWING SUSAN RICE’S ADVICE!!!
She did something Obama appreciated, however.
On Rwanda she suggested the USA vote “present.”
2. Prior to Sept. 11, 2001 Osama bin Ladin was in Sudan.
Sudan offered to help the USA capture him.
Susan Rice opposed this.
We talk about Bill Clinton’s dereliction of duty.
But we should talk about the woman who had his ear and encouraged him not to get bin Ladin.
Today, November 27th, 4:44pm Mountain Time. Top Headline on Google:
GOP senators ‘hold’ on to flimsy criticism of Rice, Benghazi
The sponsoring agency is shown as NBCNews.com
If you hit the link, you go to MSNBC.com, specifically Martin Bashir’s page. The whole “story” is a propaganda piece to make you think McCain and gang are jerks for not going away about Benhgazi.
Is this the nation we now live in, where the state-run media lies for the WH, al a Cold War Pravda-style?
There are so many things that the WH should want to clear up, but this is just ridiculous.
I feel sorry for them always using the RACE CARD, because they have nothing else to critic on
the poor DEMOCRATS so desperate, crying to the people for having been victimize by THE PEOPLE,
aren’t the role inverse there? aren’t they suppose to SERVE THE PEOPLE?
BUT THEY ARE SO WEAK, that the people feel sorry for them, and re-elect them
on compassion for their weakness.
they say please elect me, I need this job,
what else would I do without it.
@Nathan Blue: You have to ask that after the last 4 years — actually for people paying attention — the last 60+ years — start waking up for real people — two main points:
1) Has been under way since the 20’s and 30’s
2) It aint just Obie
@Nan G:
And not just the Rwandan genocide. Consider this observation from Ethiopian review:
Obama’s adviser on human rights accuses Susan Rice of being a bystander to genocide
Bystanders to Genocide
Mike O’Malley
OH MY GOD,
did OBAMA knew her then? If yes, that is trouble for him,
just the fact he want her in that position, is very wrong,
It’s EVERYWHERE………….
http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae277/RAPH6969/111.jpg
Interesting piece.
excellent article.
@Nan G:
thank you for the reminder about susan’s history. i am sure that she will say that she has learned alot since then, but given her recent complicity in the benghazi situation, one would think that in fact she has learned nothing
VanZorge
it look like she repeated the advice she gave to PRESIDENT CLINTON before on the slaughter in AFRICA.
advice to OBAMA to refuse to send security to help the AMBASSADOR from being kill, he seem to trust her
quite a bit
to plan a bigger position for her, and willing to fight for it.
and more , that is to tell the SEALS to stay down, and leave the BENGHASI AMBASSADOR TO DEFEND HIMSELF , PLUS being responsible of the death of the SEALS, WHO WOULD NOT LEAVE THE AMBASSADOR TO HIMSELF, AND DECIDE TO GO,
she might have done it again, as she said before in AFRICA,
CHOSE THE FIRE AND DEATH, IT look like OBAMA took her advice and deny the demands for help.
that’s my understanding, they are together in their mindset,
the only difference now , is that PRESIDENT CLINTON is said to have regretted listening to SUSAN RICE advice, he said it’s the worse thing I have done is to listen to her advice.
but OBAMA did not say anything,
that is a plausible scenario, because he vehemently keep protecting her, that is more than what we ‘re being told, and the SENATORS KNOW MORE THAN WHAT THEY TELL US,
BUT THEY CANNOT PROVE IT TANGIBLY
@ilovebeeswarzone:
good observation
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Thank you Beez.
I can amplify your observations. In late 1994 I read an extensive critique made of Pres. Clinton’s failure to stop the Rwandan genocide. The critique was written by left-wing human rights activists who had been actively lobbying the Clinton Whitehouse to intervene and stop the genocide in the Winter of 1994. I recall that they identified Susan Rice as Pres. Clinton’s representative to the press on this matter and that it was Susan Rice who dissembled for Clinton (lied to the press; Wash. Post and others) denying that a genocide was going on. Susan Rice I recall relayed the Clinton administration party line explaining that the Whitehouse was aware of (isolated) “acts of genocide” taking place in Rwanda but that the Whitehouse did not believe that genocide was taking place. The left-wing human rights activists explained that such a position was impossible since they and the CIA provided amble evidence to Pres. Clinton that a long planned genocide was indeed underway in Rwanda.
Now I’m work on memory mind you. I think I may have a copy of that report somewhere. Maybe I can find it and double check and provide a link so you all can check too.
Mike O’Malley
yes you are right, there was a CANADIAN GENERAL,also trying to intervene, he was desperatly asking for help to the whole world, he did not have enough troops to fight the regime of blood thirsty people working for that demon,
the GENERAL WAS CRYING FOR WHAT HE SAW AND WAS NOT ABLE TO STOP,
they where no more humans they where beast from hell turned loose by the devil himself,
that GENERAL HAD BEEN IN WARZONE MANY YEARS, BUT WHEN HE CAME BACK,
HE TOLD OF IT AND HE BECAME SO DEPRESS THAT HE WAS CARRYING THAT MEMORY WHICH DID NOT WANT TO LEAVE HIM,
I don’t know at this time if he is still alive, and like a PTSD FROM THE WARRIORS who have seen hell,
he suffered also. even with all the decorations he was given, where not enough to heal his wounded soul.
Gee, what a shock. Not one post here from greg, tom, rich, or lib#2.
Their silence is quite telling.
H.R. Is there any question that 50+ Dem. Senators will support Susan Rice if her name is placed in nom. for Sec. of State?
BTW I personally think very highly of Condi Rice.
You ducked the question as usual.
I guess admitting the bigotry and hypocrisy from your side is just asking for too much honesty or integrity from you.
H.R. I ducked nothing. It’s called politics.You oughta know with that moniker.
BTW Unfortunately bigotry,,racism and hypocrisy exist on all sides in this wonderful yet imperfect society we live in.
@Richard Wheeler:
Nice cop out-again. You refuse to address the abundant bigotry your side constantly displays. That leads me to believe you approve of it provided your side is the one delivering.
You challenged me to comment on Askin, but refuse to comment on your side. You only prove your hypocrisy and cowardice.
Check this out.
http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/surprise-susan-rice-has-investments-in-companies-doing-business-with-iran/
Hard Right
that is quite a revelation of the Susan Rice best interests,
maybe she’s got some from her friends who trust her enough , and don’t want their name on it,
yes trust her to propel her on higher grounds , where you scratch my back and I’LL scratch you’re