Comments on: Condi Rice Confirmation Hearing in Progress

By: Cybrludite

Cybrludite — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:16:18 +0000

Awfully clever of W. to have gotten President Clinton in on the WMD conspiracy waaay back while Smirky McChimpler was still Governor of Texas. There's a world of difference between being wrong & lying. For example, if you are unaware that:

Iraqi nuclear researchers hid their notes & buried a prototype centerfuge for weapons grade plutonium refinement

and that:

Stocks of chemicals used in nerve gas production were found stockpiled in Iraq after our invasion in quantities far too large for the sundry civilian uses for those chemicals.

And that:

Saddam had a long history of using chemical weapons against the Iranians & the Kurds.

And that:

After the 1991 Gulf War we discovered that instead of being years away from being able to build nukes, Saddam had been only months away and that mainly due to a lack of suitable fissile materials.

And that:

Even after the 1991 Gulf War, we'd overlooked his bioweapons program until his son-in-laws defected & spilled the beans.

then you'd be wrong for saying that "There were none, there never seemed to be any, there never seemed to be the risk of anyâ¦ in Iraq." If you were aware of these facts and them made such a statement, then you would be lying.

By: anjin-san

anjin-san — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:38:59 +0000

Bryan,

Cities across America face budget cuts because of the expense of the Iraq war. Health care for seniors declines. Education declines (no child left behind is massivly underfunded) Our infrastructure (which is crucial to homeland security) crumbles. Brave Americans die in Iraq almost every day.

Yes, we must go back over the WMD issue.

By: Steve Talbert

Steve Talbert — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 05:19:11 +0000

It seems we have to keep going over the WMD issue. There were none, there never seemed to be any, there never seemed to be the risk of any... in Iraq. Only half the people in the US seem to understand that. (I guess that half was not home schooled in creation science or intelligent design)

They can kill as many people as they want, but there won't be any found. Bush and Cheney can say the same things over and over, but that won't make them true.

The real threat was and continues to be in Afganistan.

By: bryan

bryan — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:32:19 +0000

Must we go back over the WMD issue?

By: anjin-san

anjin-san — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:56:00 +0000

Boxer does tend to grandstand, and she is not one of the brighter minds in the Senate. Rice was in the thick of the lies to America and the world that led us into the Iraq disaster.

Which is worse?

I dislike Boxer, and my experience with her goes back to when she was my county supervisor in Marin and before. On the other hand. someone has to hold Rice accountable for her actions, since in the Bush admin the only thing you are held accountable for is your blind loyalty.

By: ken

ken — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:47:49 +0000

The Bush admininistration, from the president on down, lied about WMD. Look folks, the truth about the matter is that Iraq did not have any WMD, you know that now as well as anyone. Iraq was not a danger to the United States.

Without any truth to charge that Iraq had WMD there could not be any evidence to back up this claim. What Rice and Bush and the other creeps did was take false claims about WMD and present them as if they were true. This is just repeating a lie. They knew, as we all did, that there was no evidence for such claims, so they used one false claim after another as evidence for other false claims. Rice was right in the middle of this. She turned her back on the truth in order to sell a policy.

Sadly, while the entire world plus half of America, knew the truth, the American press and politicians were bullied into not publicaly repudiating the Bush lies. And conservatives? Well they just swallowed the bs without blinking an eye. That is how well trained they are.

By: Truth. Quante-fied.

Truth. Quante-fied. — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 00:11:09 +0000

You Said It, LTC Ryan
Boxer really doesn't understand a damn thing, but luckily Rice is able to defend her integrity with nothing more than the truth. Go see Outside the Beltway for more about this.

By: bryan

bryan — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:53:43 +0000

Actually, I heard part of Finestein's intro on NPR, and it was a pretty class introduction. Boxer, on the other hand, was clearly being an ass. If you're going to say someone lied, don't say they "lost respect for the truth." I'm sure that drove Rice up the wall, being called a liar by a California grape nut grandstander using flowery terms.

By: Bachbone

Bachbone — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:13:26 +0000

My California friends tell me they think there should be fewer Boxers and more briefs.

By: Zed

Zed — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:11:23 +0000

wasn't it Feinstein who included Rice in her book on "great women leaders" back ~~stabbing~~ scratching ?

By: Walter E. Wallis

Walter E. Wallis — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:08:11 +0000

Boxer should be held to answer for the fact that she and her North Bay lady political associates came to power on an anti-military platform that among other things drove most of California's military bases away. Barbara HATED the military and did everything in her power to criple them.

By: Just Me

Just Me — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:51:55 +0000

I only saw a small portion of the hearings, since I had to get my son from kindergarten. I did get to hear Kerry's remarks (don't really remember there being much of a question in there). The Kerry remarks was almost his stump speech from the election, and I thought "oh my, he has forgotten he lost the election and is still running for president." I didn't get to see him actually ask her anything, but it gave me a chuckle. Up to that point, she seemed to be holding her own pretty well, but the senators asking questions weren't too hard on her either, when I was watching up until Kerry started his campaign speech.