|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 11/15/04 - 17:40 Post subject:
I think she means "God forbid Condi takes Powell's place" and if so, I'm so with you PC.
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 17:41 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | I think she means "God forbid Condi takes Powell's place" and if so, I'm so with you PC. |
good for you, now you defend why you are so against her. I for one think she is intelligent articulate and an excellent role model.
|
|
|
|
|
genie
Master of Prissface
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 16194
Location: Finding serenity one day at a time
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 17:52 Post subject:
As far as the resignations go, I asked my roomie the history major and he tells me that it is commonplace during any president's second term for most, if not all, the major officers of the cabinet to tender their resignations whether they are interested in leaving or not and then the President will choose whose resignation to accept or not. This way, if someone wants out or if he wants to make a change, or if its mutual, it doesn't reflect negatively on anyone or stir up rumors that people are, as you put it, jumping ship.
|
|
|
|
|
Sahara
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 17 May 2002
Posts: 3345
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 17:57 Post subject:
It is indeed customary that all those with appointed positions to enter their written resignation. Typically only those who retire to the private sector do so with the intent of truly resigning.
I must do a little leg work on Ms. Rice. I don't have a firm understanding of her history in this administration.
|
|
|
|
|
phillycat
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 1953
Location: Da hood
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 18:12 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | I think she means "God forbid Condi takes Powell's place" and if so, I'm so with you PC. |
Exactly.
And as far as this statement goes
"You better qualify what you mean..."
Or what? If you would like me to qualify it, no problem. But saying that I'd better qualify it....no thanks. I don't have to do anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 18:59 Post subject:
| phillycat wrote: |
Exactly.
And as far as this statement goes
"You better qualify what you mean..."
Or what? If you would like me to qualify it, no problem. But saying that I'd better qualify it....no thanks. I don't have to do anything. |
Can you qualify your remarks (the God forbid ones)...please
I am curious to see your reasoning
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 19:03 Post subject:
| phillycat wrote: |
Exactly.
And as far as this statement goes
"You better qualify what you mean..."
Or what? If you would like me to qualify it, no problem. But saying that I'd better qualify it....no thanks. I don't have to do anything. |
you used the emphasis not me. I only want you to defend your statement. You make a comment without any reason I want to know why.
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 19:05 Post subject:
| rtpd113 wrote: |
you used the emphasis not me. I only want you to defend your statement. You make a comment without any reason I want to know why. |
So would I, and if its at all possible without sarcasm
|
|
|
|
|
megawill
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1552
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 19:42 Post subject:
| rtpd113 wrote: |
good for you, now you defend why you are so against her. I for one think she is intelligent articulate and an excellent role model. |
excellent role model to whom?
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 19:43 Post subject:
| megawill wrote: |
excellent role model to whom? |
Maybe to him (rtpd)
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 19:49 Post subject:
| megawill wrote: |
excellent role model to whom? |
to black women especially. To attain that level of achievment is quite an accomplishment.
One may not like her for whatever reason, but she has attained a pretty high status. No one can question that. That is quite a story of what hard work can get someone.
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 20:23 Post subject:
I think the objection here is "You better..." I believe you meant to say that she needed to clarify which statement she was referring to. However, when I read it the first time, I also had to read that again. I know it's been a long day for you, Joe. "You better" implies that Claire had darn well better do something or else, which is of course not the case.
On to Dr. Rice. A smart woman who was Stanford's provost, she's also the leftiest thing in the administration at the moment. I just can't believe it's come down to hoping for moderates. I take back my "God forbid" agreement b/c all things considered, it's not a major power shift if she gets it.
I don't like her, despite all her achievements, because like so many others, she's beholden to corporations. (Don't believe me? What was Chevron's 'Altair Voyager' named before W named CR National Security Advisor?) Thus I don't believe she can be partial in matters related to those industries (ie war in Iraq). I realize that while they're in the Administration they're not on boards, but you're kidding yourself if you think that once they go back to private life, they won't be.
Also, I believe she should not have hemmed and hawed about testifying before Congress re: 9/11. Her determination that it was a "long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress" doesn't mean squat. And although I believe that a lot of government goes on covertly, I just don't believe that the Bush Adminstration was as on top of the Al-Qaida threat in the days leading up to 9/11 as her statement indicates. So I think she's a liar.
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 20:31 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | I think the objection here is "You better..." I believe you meant to say that she needed to clarify which statement she was referring to. However, when I read it the first time, I also had to read that again. I know it's been a long day for you, Joe. "You better" implies that Claire had darn well better do something or else, which is of course not the case. |
Perhaps his choice of word was not the best, but she could have answered the question without the sarcasm.
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 20:35 Post subject:
| Cappy wrote: |
Perhaps his choice of word was not the best, but she could have answered the question without the sarcasm. |
I don't read any sarcasm in what PC said. He wasn't careful about what he wrote, she called him on it, end of story, Let's move on.
Why do you like CR?
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 11/15/04 - 20:37 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: |
Why do you like CR? |
Don't know much of her politics, but I like the fact that she is an intelligent woman, in a very powerful position in the administration.
|
|
|
|
