ForumGarden

Jack Sprat wrote: Sorry, as much of a liberal as I am, I cannot accept that. Rice is an extremely intelligent person. She is though, as stated by several conservatives, the most hawkish cabinet member in the last 40 years. In addition, she is more interested in pleasing the warped ideologies of her master-in-chief than in using her intellect wisely. I have far more respect for Christie Todd Whittman who recognized that it's better to be honest to one's beliefs than to bow down to the shortsightedness of the current administration.
uh, "master-in-chief"? so, the racism continues to be acceptable?

Jack Sprat wrote: Sorry, unintentional. By now everyone here knows my feelings about Bush: that he believes he is the fourth coming of the messiah (Christ, Mohammed, and George Burns preceded him). Personally I can only believe in George Burns.
i suppose, although bill clinton talked far more about god, praying to god, talking to god, seeking out god's advice, et al, than george bush has so far. but then mr. bush has only been in office half as long. so far, i don't recall ever seeing any photos of the bush family in their sunday best heading off to church. oddly enough, every month or two for eight years we were treated to photo ops of bill and family heading off the church, or leaving church, or shaking hands with the pastor at the end of the service.



why is it okay for a democrat to talk about god, but not a republican?

Jack Sprat wrote: What gave you the idea that I was a Democrat (I am not) or supported Clinton? Sorry to disappoint. I am an equal-opportunity non-partisan atheist.
sorry to disappoint, but i said neither of the things you are suggesting i said. you're inferring that from what i wrote, but i didn't imply it.



but if you really are an equal-opportunity non-partisan atheist, then wouldn't that mean that george bush is fifth coming of christ, after bouncin' baptist bill clinton?

the majority of all that is a joyous wallow in 20/20 hindsight.

we all wish we could turn back the clock.

anastrophe wrote: uh, "master-in-chief"? so, the racism continues to be acceptable?
Oh ugh! Using the word "master" is now racist? If we've got to start watching every word that we use so we don't offend someone somewhere over something, then we may as well quit talking.



"Master" used negatively implies that one person virtually owns the soul of another person. That isn't about race. JMHO

With the deluge in intelligence coming in every second, how would one know which report to act on? Ms. Rice is very intelligent. What about the conspiracy stories that were just posted here? Any value in that?

Pearl Harbor wrote: What about the conspiracy stories that were just posted here? Any value in that?
Welllll....yes! I keep thinking some of these conspiracy theories would make a great dime-store novel.

A Karenina wrote: Oh ugh! Using the word "master" is now racist? If we've got to start watching every word that we use so we don't offend someone somewhere over something, then we may as well quit talking.



"Master" used negatively implies that one person virtually owns the soul of another person. That isn't about race. JMHO
in the context of *this* discussion, with racist depictions and characterizations of african americans, where a radio host has referred to condoleeza rice as 'aunt jemima', and with the history of whites as masters to black slaves in this country, i think at best it is what jack said it was, unintentional. but again, in the context of this conversation, it fell right in line with the stereotypical characterizations that preceded the comment. again, i've had people in conversation characterize dr. rice and colin powell as "tokens", and mean it seriously, and *not* get that it's racist - simply because dr. rice and mr. powell, being conservatives, don't get the same respect conferred upon them as would 'real black people' who are implicitly liberal.



had the comment come in any other conversation here, it wouldnt' have even registered.

I see what you mean...and I wanna talk about the whole "in a better world" scenario, but I'm tired from writing a very boring paper for school. (yawn)

Why is it so hard for most of us to stay on the topic of the thread?

I like discussions but most of these turn into people just exersizing their own personal adgendas.

As far as Ms. Rice is concerned, I think until the adminastration comes up with some kind of coherent foreign policy it is impossible to judge her ability to carry out that policy. But lack of a coherent foreign policy is a problem our nation has had for 30 years. Our gov. is way to reactive with what appears to me to be a distinct lack of foresight and planning.

Until you know the plan how can you tell if she is good at implementing the plan?

Her past is of no concern nor are her beliefs, just how well she carries out our elected officials policies of which there don't seem to be any on foreign affairs.