“A new poll of New York State voters suggests a hypothetical John McCain-Condoleezza Rice ticket would beat the so-called ‘dream ticket’ of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, even though Rice has sought to douse rumors that she’s seeking the VP slot.”
If this is true, then Americans deserve to have their blood sucked dry by these two neoconservative vampires.
The presumptive Republican nominee is a neoconservative deluxe. Read my detailed analysis of “the pollution he has left along his political path” in “Mitt’s Gone, Bill’s Back.”
Condi’s his evil ideological twin—a neocon. At the very least, how can the genus Boobus Americanus forget this woman’s role, as the head of the National Security Council, in September 11?
As I wrote in “Hold Their Feet To The Fire”:
“According to Rice’s official bafflegab, a 1999 report by the Library of Congress stating that suicide bombers belonging to al-Qaida could crash an aircraft into U.S. targets belongs to the realm of analysis. It wasn’t ‘actionable intelligence.’”
“Incredible doesn’t quite describe what Condoleezza calls intelligence ‘specifics.’ The National Security Adviser [implied back then that she would have] moved to act if she [had gotten] word of time, place and method of attack. What next? A gilded, personalized invitation to attend the crime scene?”
She headed “an office created by the National Security Act of 1947 to advise the president on ‘integration of domestic, foreign and military policies relating to national security and to facilitate interagency cooperation.’ If suspicion existed – analytic, synthetic, prosaic or poetic – Rice should have put the squeeze on the system she [oversaw].” Or so I wrote in 2002.
Condoleezza was a colossal failure. If this new pole is accurate, Americans are emotional wrecks. I suspect they’re responding to the Ebony and Ivory seduction.
Update 1 (April 12): In 2005 I consigned Condi to the hate America crowd. Here’s why:
“Hating America is wildly in vogue among Bush and his devotees. Condi and acolytes, in particular, showcased their contempt for this country’s history by continually comparing the carnage in Iraq to the constitutional cramps of early America. As The Wall Street Journal put it, ‘There were a few glitches 200 years ago in Philadelphia too.’ For its part, Fox News kept coupling George Washington’s name with Saddam’s slimy successors: à la mode, man!”
“No matter that faction fighting in Iraq is as old as the sand dunes. As James L. Payne has reminded those struck with historical Alzheimer’s, there are cultural barriers to democracy, chief of which is a high-violence society. Iraq is—and has always been—a society in which assassinations, riots and terrorism are viewed by a large segment of the public and its leaders as legitimate tools in a political struggle. Iraq is a high-violence society now. And it was one in the days of Sumer, Saddam, and in the millennia in-between.”
“Yes, the uncivilized hoots, hollers, and deadly blasts instigated by members of Iraq’s tribal troika capture to a tee the tone of the debates in, what’s that document called? The Fedayeen Papers?”