The W
Views: 97828056
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
30.7.07 2237
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Condi Doesn't Rule Run, Maybe Makes Point Moot Anyhow Register and log in to post!
(348 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (7 total)
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 3141/5402
EXP: 26905185
For next: 226819

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 12.3.05 1838.57
Reposted on: 12.3.12 1841.03
So in an interview with the Washington Times (washtimes.com) Condoleezza Rice was asked about her interest in running for President and her stance on abortion. Two quotes from the article:

    Originally posted by Condoleezza Rice's interview
    She was then pressed on whether she would rule out a White House bid by reprising Gen. William T. Sherman's 1884 declaration: "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." "Well, that's not fair," she protested with a chuckle. "The last thing I can I really can't imagine it."

    Miss Rice said abortion should be "as rare a circumstance as possible," although without excessive government intervention. "We should not have the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other.


While saying one has no interest is part of any high-level official's routine when asked about running for President, the second quote greatly intrigues me. I wonder if her steadfast loyalty to Bush and willingness to very quietly eat a lot of blame for the Iraq WMD debacle that she could easily have punted elsewhere would be enough to let the most important parts of Bush's base see past her stance on the critical issue of abortion. I personally can't imagine her getting through a primary season with that, no matter what else she might have to say. It seems impossible to me that she could get any support in the South and the Midwest in GOP primaries as a pro-choice candidate, no matter how mildly so.


Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 4559/7534
EXP: 43325808
For next: 975954

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 395 days
Last activity: 395 days
#2 Posted on 12.3.05 1921.14
Reposted on: 12.3.12 1923.41
On the Sherman quote: It really is moot at this point, as with the current primary system it is a virtual impossibility to get nominated without vigorous campaigning, let alone getting the nomination without wanting it.
At this point, 2008 would be very doubtful for Rice just due to the logistics of being Secretary of State. Unless she were to leave the office by mid '07, she wouldn't have the ability to run a campaign while simultaneously functioning in her current position.
And, as a limited government conservative, Rice's wanting to limit the scope of the federal government is fine with me.
bash91
Merguez
Level: 55

Posts: 405/711
EXP: 1284787
For next: 29411

Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 714 days
Last activity: 46 min.
#3 Posted on 12.3.05 2106.54
Reposted on: 12.3.12 2110.29
    Originally posted by spf
    I wonder if her steadfast loyalty to Bush and willingness to very quietly eat a lot of blame for the Iraq WMD debacle that she could easily have punted elsewhere would be enough to let the most important parts of Bush's base see past her stance on the critical issue of abortion. I personally can't imagine her getting through a primary season with that, no matter what else she might have to say. It seems impossible to me that she could get any support in the South and the Midwest in GOP primaries as a pro-choice candidate, no matter how mildly so.


Baldly put, there's no way Dr. Rice survives the GOP primary season as a pro-choice candidate, no matter how mild her position may be. Abortion is just too much of a litmus test for both parties, witness the Tim Roemer NARAL debacle on the other side of the aisle, for either party to allow a Presidential candidate to be an heretic.

Tim
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1073/3341
EXP: 13049627
For next: 41726

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on 13.3.05 1144.48
Reposted on: 13.3.12 1145.54
    Originally posted by spf
    "We should not have the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other. "

    While saying one has no interest is part of any high-level official's routine when asked about running for President, the second quote greatly intrigues me. I wonder if her steadfast loyalty to Bush and willingness to very quietly eat a lot of blame for the Iraq WMD debacle that she could easily have punted elsewhere would be enough to let the most important parts of Bush's base see past her stance on the critical issue of abortion. I personally can't imagine her getting through a primary season with that, no matter what else she might have to say. It seems impossible to me that she could get any support in the South and the Midwest in GOP primaries as a pro-choice candidate, no matter how mildly so.



That'd be Bush's stance as well, guys, He's all about repealing Roe Vs Wade and letting the states dictate abortion rights. The Feds have no right to be involved in this decision. The States do the medical stuff and individual laws. I feel this is much like the anti-smoking rules - states can make that decision for themselves.

Now is it an important decision? Yes. Would it make Abortion more difficult for some? Probably. I think Rice is right on in her stance.

(edited by AWArulz on 13.3.05 1246)
Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 145

Posts: 3554/6714
EXP: 37275185
For next: 328987

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#5 Posted on 14.3.05 0010.33
Reposted on: 14.3.12 0011.45
Man, Hillary vs. Condi in 2008? Catfight! Catfight! [/Kramer]
LionJeetSingh
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 272/282
EXP: 305696
For next: 2417

Since: 3.3.03

Since last post: 3221 days
Last activity: 3048 days
#6 Posted on 14.3.05 0946.29
Reposted on: 14.3.12 0947.47
I'm surprsied nobody has pointed out the fact that she's a black female. I realize it is a typical stereotype but a great deal of Southern Christian Republicans would never even consider it.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1343/2692
EXP: 8776693
For next: 212126

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
#7 Posted on 14.3.05 1104.23
Reposted on: 14.3.12 1106.05
    Originally posted by LionJeetSingh
    I'm surprsied nobody has pointed out the fact that she's a black female. I realize it is a typical stereotype but a great deal of Southern Christian Republicans would never even consider it.


You may be right. I would add in she ha never been married and there are some "questions" regarding her sexuality.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Blake Gets Away With It....Oh, I Mean...
Next thread: Congressmen spend in private like the do in public
Previous thread: Fatwa against Bin Ladin (took em long enough)
(348 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Condi Doesn't Rule Run, Maybe Makes Point Moot AnyhowRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.153 seconds.