Why would she be hanging out with these folks?

[Blown 472]

I dont understand it, could some one give me an answer?
Latest Gay Republican Outing - Condoleezza Rice
Friday, September 14, 2007
Condi's "Closest Female Friend"
Yesterday on the show I had an interesting conversation with Washington Post diplomatic correspondent Glenn Kessler, whose new book is The Confidante: Condoleezza Rice and the Creation of the Bush Legacy.
There have long been questions about Rice's sexual orientation and her personal life in general. As Kessler notes, "She has built a wall of privacy around her that is never breached." But Kessler had access to Rice's closest friends and to Rice herself, and he reveals some eyebrow-raising information that hasn't been out there before.
In the book and on the show, Kessler described how Rice's "closest male friend" is openly gay, a man by the name of Coit D. Blacker, a Stanford professor (Rice was provost at Stanford in the late 1990s for six years) and a Democrat who served in the Clinton administration. Blacker, whose partner is also mentioned, advised Al Gore's campaign in 2000, while his close friend Rice became a chief confidante to a president who has tried to make gays into second class citizens in the U.S. Constitution. But wait, it gets better.
Rice's "closest female friend" is a woman named Randy Bean (pictured here), who is unmarried and whose sexual orientation is not stated. She is described as a "liberal progressive;" she's a documentary filmmaker who works at Standford University and once worked for Bill Moyers.
According to newly revealed information in the book (which Kessler found through real estate records), the two women, Rice and Bean (yes, hilarious), own a home together and have a line of credit together. Bean explains this to Kessler by saying that she had some medical bills that drained her financially years ago, and Rice and Blacker helped her out by buying the house with Bean. But over time Blacker sold his share of the house to Rice and Bean, and then Rice would later get the line of credit with Bean to do some renovations on the home. Kessler, when pressed, said he did not know if this meant there was something more to the relationship between the women beyond a friendship.
Where to begin?
For the record, in the book Kessler goes into the long-discussed rumors about Rice and the few times her sexual orientation has been gossiped about or discussed in the media, but he also talks about how single, older (heterosexual) women often "unfairly" have their sexual orientation questioned, and says in the book that Rice has been the target of "nasty attacks" in this regard. He mentions that she was linked to a man once -- back in college. Even if Rice is heterosexual, however, it is fascinating and mind-boggling that this woman whose best male friend is an openly gay liberal and whose best female "friend" is a "liberal progressive," would work for a president who has opposed every gay rights initiative and tried to enshrine religious hatred in the Constitution. What does it say about them as well?
Kessler, who is even-handed (and the bulk of whose book is about foreign policy, where he offers many interesting new insights, which we also discussed at length), reminded me that Rice doesn't work on the domestic side and only works on foreign policy, so she can't be held responsible for Bush's positions on those issues. But to me, that's like someone who worked for Mussolini saying, "I only helped to get the trains to run on time." (Though Rice hasn't even accomplished that much.)
Oh, and I thought you'd get a kick out of this passage:
She and Rice and Blacker (again, who has a partner) are discussed as a "second family," a term Bean uses, also saying that, "on friends, [Rice] goes narrow and deep."
After she became secretary of state, she came to a party at Blacker's house, kicked off her shoes, and began dancing through the night to rock and and roll. Blacker, who is gay, wanted to show his partner how tight her behind is; he postulated that if he aimed a quarter at her butt, it would bounce off like a rocket. He was right. Rice, who was dancing, didn't realize what he had done until everyone began laughing hysterically. She was flattered -- and proud.

[never_fast_enuf]

Well, since you didn't post a link to the article I can only assume you are talking about the author of said article. I really have no idea unless she knows Condoleezza?

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Well, since you didn't post a link to the article I can only assume you are talking about the author of said article. I really have no idea unless she knows Condoleezza?
Condoleezza is a memoryless POS just like Alberto R. Gonzales. I saw her get questioned by the 9/11 committee "I really don't remember" "I don't remember"

[never_fast_enuf]

Looks to me like she had a whole hell of a lot to say.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/08/rice.transcript/
Now Billy boy Clintoon was a whole different story...dude needs some Ginkgo Biloba..either that or he has Alzheimer's
FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES: In the portions of President Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times. This is a list of his answers and how many times he gave each one.
I don't remember - 71
I don't know - 62
I'm not sure - 17
I have no idea - 10
I don't believe so - 9
I don't recall - 8
I don't think so - 8
I don't have any specific recollection - 6
I have no recollection - 4
Not to my knowledge - 4
I just don't remember - 4
I don't believe - 4
I have no specific recollection - 3
I might have - 3
I don't have any recollection of that - 2 I don't have a specific memory - 2
I don't have any memory of that - 2
I just can't say - 2
I have no direct knowledge of that - 2
I don't have any idea - 2
Not that I recall - 2
I don't believe I did - 2
I can't remember - 2
I can't say - 2
I do not remember doing so - 2
Not that I remember - 2
I'm not aware - 1
I honestly don't know - 1
I don't believe that I did - 1
I'm fairly sure - 1
I have no other recollection - 1
I'm not positive - 1
I certainly don't think so - 1
I don't really remember - 1
I would have no way of remembering that - 1
That's what I believe happened - 1
To my knowledge, no - 1
To the best of my knowledge - 1
To the best of my memory - 1
I honestly don't recall - 1
I honestly don't remember - 1
That's all I know - 1
I don't have an independent recollection of that - 1
I don't actually have an independent memory of that - 1
As far as I know - 1
I don't believe I ever did that - 1
That's all I know about that - 1
I'm just not sure - 1
Nothing that I remember - 1
I simply don't know - 1
I would have no idea - 1
I don't know anything about that - 1
I don't have any direct knowledge of that - 1
I just don't know - 1
I really don't know - 1
I can't deny that, I just -- I have no memory of that at all - 1

[Blown 472]

Looks to me like she had a whole hell of a lot to say.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/08/rice.transcript/
Now Billy boy Clintoon was a whole different story...dude needs some Ginkgo Biloba..either that or he has Alzheimer's
FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES: In the portions of President Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times. This is a list of his answers and how many times he gave each one.
I don't remember - 71
I don't know - 62
I'm not sure - 17
I have no idea - 10
I don't believe so - 9
I don't recall - 8
I don't think so - 8
I don't have any specific recollection - 6
I have no recollection - 4
Not to my knowledge - 4
I just don't remember - 4
I don't believe - 4
I have no specific recollection - 3
I might have - 3
I don't have any recollection of that - 2 I don't have a specific memory - 2
I don't have any memory of that - 2
I just can't say - 2
I have no direct knowledge of that - 2
I don't have any idea - 2
Not that I recall - 2
I don't believe I did - 2
I can't remember - 2
I can't say - 2
I do not remember doing so - 2
Not that I remember - 2
I'm not aware - 1
I honestly don't know - 1
I don't believe that I did - 1
I'm fairly sure - 1
I have no other recollection - 1
I'm not positive - 1
I certainly don't think so - 1
I don't really remember - 1
I would have no way of remembering that - 1
That's what I believe happened - 1
To my knowledge, no - 1
To the best of my knowledge - 1
To the best of my memory - 1
I honestly don't recall - 1
I honestly don't remember - 1
That's all I know - 1
I don't have an independent recollection of that - 1
I don't actually have an independent memory of that - 1
As far as I know - 1
I don't believe I ever did that - 1
That's all I know about that - 1
I'm just not sure - 1
Nothing that I remember - 1
I simply don't know - 1
I would have no idea - 1
I don't know anything about that - 1
I don't have any direct knowledge of that - 1
I just don't know - 1
I really don't know - 1
I can't deny that, I just -- I have no memory of that at all - 1
This is so like 8 years ago, nice try to get off subject thou, now back to condi and her friends, you know the libs she hangs with and the fags too.
Must be hard to swallow all the crap these folks feed you and you put all your trust in them only to find out they are not what they say they are, where is a superhero when you need him, or some sports star for ya to look up to.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

My comment had nothing to do with Billy Boy it had to with Condi.
Having convenient forgetful spells like the you have quited from Clinton, IMO, are quite different when they involve a matter of National Security.
To me, it matters not whether Condi likes the ladies but then again I'm not a Republican Senator

[Old Texan]

Condoleezza is a memoryless POS just like Alberto R. Gonzales. I saw her get questioned by the 9/11 committee "I really don't remember" "I don't remember"
I need someone to explain just what Alberto Gonzales did that was considered so contemptable by the Dems? I've just never picked up on anything but the fact they wouldn't approve of "anyone" Bush put in the position.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

I need someone to explain just what Alberto Gonzales did that was considered so contemptable by the Dems? I've just never picked up on anything but the fact they wouldn't approve of "anyone" Bush put in the position.
Tex,
IMO, Alberto Gonzales had way to many memory losses when questioned. Not sure what the Dems took issue with.

[Old Texan]

Tex,
IMO, Alberto Gonzales had way to many memory losses when questioned. Not sure what the Dems took issue with.
Ahhh, thus the qualifications for a "POS" are "memory losses"......
Pretty open ended statement that could include a magnitude of folks on both sides. Hillary and campaign funding comes to mind rather recently......

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Ahhh, thus the qualifications for a "POS" are "memory losses"......
Pretty open ended statement that could include a magnitude of folks on both sides. Hillary and campaign funding comes to mind rather recently......
Convenient memory losses when dealing with National Security issues are inexcusable. Politics as usual doesn't fly with me in this arena.
There are many who come to mind when considering this issue.

[eliminatedsprinter]

This whole thread isn't worth wasting 10 words on.:rolleyes:

[Old Texan]

Convenient memory losses when dealing with National Security issues are inexcusable. Politics as usual doesn't fly with me in this arena.
There are many who come to mind when considering this issue.
Memory losses vs. trumped up accusations based on loose facts taken out of context to overthrow an administration??????? Which is worse.............

[Kachina26]

This whole thread isn't worth wasting 10 words on.:rolleyes:
Well if you include the smilie, you just did. Have you ever clicked on one of this guys' copy/paste posts that was worth responding to?

[eliminatedsprinter]

Well if you include the smilie, you just did. Have you ever clicked on one of this guys' copy/paste posts that was worth responding to?
:D

[QuickJet]

What did Gonzalez have to do with National security? I think he was a piece of shit for other reasons (not firing the right prosecutors) but that's a different story.
As far as Condi Rice goes, she's just following the "Don't ask Don't tell" mantra the Clinton enacted. And who's to say she's gay? And if she was, she's not out beating her chest for same sex marriage (which would be her only hypocrisy). Hey I like street racing, but if Governor I wouldn't make legal.
BTW I'm not against same sex marriage..............;)

[never_fast_enuf]

My comment had nothing to do with Billy Boy it had to with Condi.
Having convenient forgetful spells like the you have quited from Clinton, IMO, are quite different when they involve a matter of National Security.
To me, it matters not whether Condi likes the ladies but then again I'm not a Republican Senator
I will never NOT take the opportunity to let you proudly display your hypocrisy.

[never_fast_enuf]

This is so like 8 years ago, nice try to get off subject thou, now back to condi and her friends, you know the libs she hangs with and the fags too.
Must be hard to swallow all the crap these folks feed you and you put all your trust in them only to find out they are not what they say they are, where is a superhero when you need him, or some sports star for ya to look up to.
This thread didn't quite go the way you had hoped, did it. See, no one gives a rip if Condi likes women, men or both.
You keep trying...and failing sponge...

[ULTRA26 # 1]

What did Gonzalez have to do with National security? I think he was a piece of shit for other reasons (not firing the right prosecutors) but that's a different story.
As far as Condi Rice goes, she's just following the "Don't ask Don't tell" mantra the Clinton enacted. And who's to say she's gay? And if she was, she's not out beating her chest for same sex marriage (which would be her only hypocrisy). Hey I like street racing, but if Governor I wouldn't make legal.
BTW I'm not against same sex marriage..............;)
Gonzalez had nothing to do with National Security. Condi following Clinton's example, when being questioned about very important issues regarding 9/11, is unacceptable. Her sexuality is her business, as is every Americans.
I will never NOT take the opportunity to let you proudly display your hypocrisy.
Nobody cares, me included. :)
BYW, the issues were 9/11 and a BJ. I view them differently.
This thread didn't quite go the way you had hoped, did it. See, no one gives a rip if Condi likes women, men or both.
You keep trying...and failing sponge...
I think Blown's point landed right where he aimed it.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Gonzalez had nothing to do with National Security. Condi following Clinton's example, when being questioned about very important issues regarding 9/11, is unacceptable. Her sexuality is her business, as is every Americans.
Nobody cares, me included. :)
BYW, the issues were 9/11 and a BJ. I view them differently.
I think Blown's point landed right where he aimed it.
Point?:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Cheezy character assasination is not a point in my book.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Point?:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Cheezy character assasination is not a point in my book.
That the folks in Washington aren't better in many ways than the rest of the field. THEY ALL SUCK:D
The Bush administration, IMO, has made way to big of deal about sexuality issues. You know the old do as we say and not as we do, mindset.

[eliminatedsprinter]

That the folks in Washington aren't better in many ways than the rest of the field. THEY ALL SUCK:D
Sec Rice took a huge pay cut to go back into public service, she has an IQ up around 200 and, by all accounts, she has been a superstar in everything she had ever attempted as an adult. Did it ever occure to you that the fact that she has not done what you would like her to have done, when she was Natn'l Security Advisor or as Sec of State, may be a reflection of how difficult her jobs have been, or because she may know things about the world that you and I don't? Or is just too easy to say she sucks and avoid having to have such complex thoughts???

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Sec Rice took a huge pay cut to go back into public service, she has an IQ up around 200 and, by all accounts, she has been a superstar in everything she had ever attempted as an adult. Did it ever occure to you that the fact that she has not done what you would like her to have done, when she was Natn'l Security Advisor or as Sec of State, may be a reflection of how difficult her jobs have been, or because she may know things about the world that you and I don't? Or is just too easy to say she sucks and avoid having to have such complex thoughts???
Don't think I ever suggested that Condi wasn't smart or capable. I have watched video of her in front of the 9/11 commission and didn't care for her play the CYA game with a National Security matter. Telling the commission she didn't remember whether she had communicated with Bush about info contained in memos and PBA's, was not what I expect from someone in that position with her ability. Either she was playing politics or she isn't qualified. I tend to believe she was playing politics with National Security.
Sorry my opinion of Condi Rice bothers you, to the point that does.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Don't think I ever suggested that Condi wasn't smart or capable. I have watched video of her in front of the 9/11 commission and didn't care for her play the CYA game with a National Security matter. Telling the commission she didn't remember whether she had communicated with Bush about info contained in memos and PBA's, was not what I expect from someone in that position with her ability. Either she was playing politics or she isn't qualified. I tend to believe she was playing politics with National Security.
Sorry my opinion of Condi Rice bothers you, to the point that does.
I'm in a pissy mood today.:idea:

[eliminatedsprinter]

The fact that someone may choose to work in an administration does not mean they agree with every single thing that administration does. Jessie Brown and Hershel Gober were very bright and capable men. They both served as Secs of Veterans Affairs during the time that the Clinton/Gore administration was dismantling and neglecting the VA. They served that administration, yet I still respect them?? Why? Because I have met them both and I knew that they were doing all that they could for the vets, with the power that they had, as they worked in a hostile evironment. I would not have wanted to have been sec of veterans affairs for Clinton/Gore and I sure as he## would not have wanted to be National Security advisor during 911. It is a thankless job (publically at least). When we are hit the finger is pointed at you (usually by foolish political hacks) and If you do a perfect and flawless job nobody notices, let alone, thanks you....

[never_fast_enuf]

Telling the commission she didn't remember whether she had communicated with Bush about info contained in memos and PBA's, was not what I expect from someone in that position with her ability. Either she was playing politics or she isn't qualified. I tend to believe she was playing politics with National Security.
At best, you are oh so naive...at worst...I won't go there.
How about you give some specific examples of her memory lapses...including the context.

[never_fast_enuf]

That the folks in Washington aren't better in many ways than the rest of the field. THEY ALL SUCK:D
The Bush administration, IMO, has made way to big of deal about sexuality issues. You know the old do as we say and not as we do, mindset.
Examples...give specific examples.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Examples...give specific examples.
I watched video of what I referred to. Didn't get it from the net.
But here
All that I can tell you is that it was not in the August 6 memo, using planes as a weapon. And I do not remember any reports to us, a kind of strategic warning, that planes might be used as weapons. In fact, there were some reports done in '98 and '99. I was certainly not aware of them at the time that I spoke.
RICE: I don't remember the discussion that Dick Clarke relates.
RICE: I remember very well that the president was aware that there were issues inside the United States. He talked to people about this. But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about.
LEHMAN: Were you aware that the INS had quietly, internally, halved its internal security enforcement budget?
RICE: I was not made aware of that. I don't remember being made aware of that, no.
RICE: And I also understood that that was what the FBI was doing, that the FBI was pursuing these al Qaeda cells. I believe in the August 6 memorandum it says that there were 70 full field investigations under way of these cells. And so there was no recommendation that we do something about this; the FBI was pursuing it. I really don't remember, Commissioner, whether I discussed this with the president.
RICE: I want to repeat that when this document was presented, it was presented as, yes, there were some frightening things -- and by the way, I was not at Crawford, but the president and I were in contact and I might have even been, though I can't remember, with him by video link during that time.
LEHMAN: Were you aware at the time of the fact that Saudi Arabia had and were you told that they had in their custody the CFO and the closest confidant of al Qaeda -- of Osama bin Laden, and refused direct access to the United States?
RICE: I don't remember anything of that kind.
Did the president meet with the director of the FBI between August 6 and September 11?
RICE: I will have to get back to you on that. I am not certain.

[Old Texan]

I can't see other than taking "I don't remember" out of context how the above excerpts can show anything other than she meant "no" or she truly didn't remember specifics about dates and meetings. When used in the coversation concerning the FBI investigation she obviously felt the FBI was doing a job that she hadn't been briefed on nor had the present need to pursue.
These are not very good examples of claims that Rice's responses in any way used to cover responsibility or involvement detrimental to national security.
John, you must do better to sell the point in order to avoid the appearance of just "hating" Rice because she is part of the Bush Administration.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

I can't see other than taking "I don't remember" out of context how the above excerpts can show anything other than she meant "no" or she truly didn't remember specifics about dates and meetings. When used in the coversation concerning the FBI investigation she obviously felt the FBI was doing a job that she hadn't been briefed on nor had the present need to pursue.
These are not very good examples of claims that Rice's responses in any way used to cover responsibility or involvement detrimental to national security.
John, you must do better to sell the point in order to avoid the appearance of just "hating" Rice because she is part of the Bush Administration.
Tex,
I saw video of Condi stating that she didn't remember whether she had briefed the President about information contained in memos she had received about al qaida and other terrorists cells in the US. National Security Adviser was her title. She either didn't do her job, or she has convent memory lapses. Given her abilities, the later is more likely.
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about. This comment was made by the National Security Adviser and I don't believe it to be true. With the Embassy bombing on 98 and the attack on the Cole in 99, doing something about al Qaeda cells shouldn't have required much thought or recollection.
This same video also showed how Bill Clinton did nothing when he the chance to take out Osama.
I donl't hate Rice and I don't hate Bush. We're been over this before.
BTW, I'm not trying to sell anyone here anything. This forum is made up of mainly Right Wing Conservatives who are rarely open to any other view.

[OGShocker]

I need someone to explain just what Alberto Gonzales did that was considered so contemptable by the Dems? I've just never picked up on anything but the fact they wouldn't approve of "anyone" Bush put in the position.
He was a son of LEGAL immigrants who happened to work for the Bush White House and the American people...

[eliminatedsprinter]

BTW, I'm not trying to sell anyone here anything. This forum is made up of mainly Right Wing Conservatives who are rarely open to any other view.
Hmmmm lets see, since Right Wing means any ideologies other than Socialism and Communisim and since Conservative simply means in favor of perseving the status quo in re to politics and traditions, I guess most of us here are those two things. I for one am a proud right winger, but I'm not very conservative, because there is much about the political status quo that I would like to change.:D

[never_fast_enuf]

Tex,
I saw video of Condi stating that she didn't remember whether she had briefed the President about information contained in memos she had received about al qaida and other terrorists cells in the US. National Security Adviser was her title. She either didn't do her job, or she has convent memory lapses. Given her abilities, the later is more likely.
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about. This comment was made by the National Security Adviser and I don't believe it to be true. With the Embassy bombing on 98 and the attack on the Cole in 99, doing something about al Qaeda cells shouldn't have required much thought or recollection.
This same video also showed how Bill Clinton did nothing when he the chance to take out Osama.
I donl't hate Rice and I don't hate Bush. We're been over this before.
BTW, I'm not trying to sell anyone here anything. This forum is made up of mainly Right Wing Conservatives who are rarely open to any other view.
Clearly Rice is saying these things didn't happen. If she lied, as you claim, then you can bet your ass the dems would have launched at her and put her UNDER the jail.
Your interpretation of her saying "I don't recall" is disingenuous at best. THAT is why I asked you for specific examples.

[eliminatedsprinter]

He was a son of LEGAL immigrants who happened to work for the Bush White House and the American people...
He did lots of bad things. He recognised the second amendment, he approved of wire tapping people as they talked to their Al Quieda pals, he even let people file suit agianst the federal government, without even hitting them with 4:00 am swat raids....;) Oh yes he did lots of things our current crop of Dems in office don't like.

[never_fast_enuf]

Ultra, you need to actually READ the transcripts of Rice's testimony. Her recollections of events are very clear and concise. If you had taken the time to read the transcripts, you wouldn't have tried to make the silly claim that Rice is full of convenient memory lapses.
As has been asked of you many times before, do some research before making such silly ignorant comments. Ignorance can be fixed...if you want to fix it. This is why I have so little patience with liberals like you…you never really seem interested in fixing your ignorance.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Ultra, you need to actually READ the transcripts of Rice's testimony. Her recollections of events are very clear and concise. If you had taken the time to read the transcripts, you wouldn't have tried to make the silly claim that Rice is full of convenient memory lapses.
As has been asked of you many times before, do some research before making such silly ignorant comments. Ignorance can be fixed...if you want to fix it. This is why I have so little patience with liberals like you…you never really seem interested in fixing your ignorance.
I have read the transcript. My claim stands and is accurate. I suggest you start opening your eyes to something other that the status quo.
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about. Apparently you are of the belief that the Commander and Chief or his National Security Adviser, must be told that something needed to be done about al Qaeda cells. If Condi was moron it would have been much easier for me to accept this statement.
A silly claim is that Bush seems like a Rhodes Schooler compared to anyone.
While you might be well read, you are far from intelligent. A issue you can't fix.
Have a nice day

[eliminatedsprinter]

I have read the transcript. My claim stands and is accurate.
Accurate as per your individual perception.
I read and saw the same questioning, yet all I percieved was her displaying great patience, as she attempted to field a bunch of pointed questions, that were posed by a bunch of political hacks. The thing I remember most about the whole thing is that none of the questioners (favorable or unfavorable) seemed the least bit interested in finding anything that was useful for anything other than making political points. It was a farce and I felt she suffered it's foolishness with about as much grace as anyone could under the circumstances.

[never_fast_enuf]

Accurate as per your individual perception.
I read and saw the same questioning, yet all I saw was her displaying great patience, as she attempted to field a bunch of pointed questions, that were posed by a bunch of political hacks. The thing I remember most about the whole thing is that none of the questioners (favorable or unfavorable) seemed the least bit interested in finding anything that was useful for anything other than making political points. It was a farce and I felt she suffered it's foolishness with about as much grace as anyone could under the circumstances.
Bing freaking O. The whole circus was a joke. It was meant to appeal to those like Ultra who aren't interested in facts...only material they can use to feed their irrational hatred of Bush and anything having to do with his administration.

[never_fast_enuf]

I have read the transcript. My claim stands and is accurate. I suggest you start opening your eyes to something other that the status quo.
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about. Apparently you are of the belief that the Commander and Chief or his National Security Adviser, must be told that something needed to be done about al Qaeda cells. If Condi was moron it would have been much easier for me to accept this statement.
A silly claim is that Bush seems like a Rhodes Schooler compared to anyone.
While you might be well read, you are far from intelligent. A issue you can't fix.
Have a nice day
You ignorant moron...that was part of a quote from an exchange from that ahole democrat (Ben-Veniste) who was only interested in trying to make the Bush admin look bad. Why don't you print the whole exchange?
Never mind, I already know that answer. If you did, all it would do is reinforce the fact that you are a retarded savant...
Apologies to rest of the retarded savants in the world.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

You ignorant moron...that was part of a quote from an exchange from that ahole democrat (Ben-Veniste) who was only interested in trying to make the Bush admin look bad. Why don't you print the whole exchange?
Never mind, I already know that answer. If you did, all it would do is reinforce the fact that you are a retarded savant...
Apologies to rest of the retarded savants in the world.
Anyone who isn't blowing Bush is an ahole. We'll talk more after you have swallowed it all.
You don't understand that it doesn't take much to make the Bush admin look bad. You need some new material. Your retarded sevant, ignorant moran is worn out.

[QuickJet]

9/11 couldn't have been prevented with any of the information that Bush had at the time. Was Bush supposed to close every airport upon receiving the Al Queda memo?
The blame for 9/11 rests with those sand niggers that took over the planes not the administration at the time. NO I'm not a Bush sympathizer by any means, I just think that the blame needs to be pointed in the right direction. The 9/11 commission came up with the same conclusion.
Now had the Bush administration received a memo stating a time and place then that would of been a different story.
I think we need to change our foreign policy. Make it a policy to not allow foreigners into this country. ;)

[never_fast_enuf]

Anyone who isn't blowing Bush is an ahole. We'll talk more after you have swallowed it all.
You don't understand that it doesn't take much to make the Bush admin look bad. You need some new material. Your retarded sevant, ignorant moran is worn out.
Funny...I am the first to rag on W for many of his domestic spending programs but I am just a Bush bot...
Umm...yeah right.
Tools like you are all the same. You spout some insane bullshit you gleaned off some nutjob website and when called on it, you deflect deflect deflect.
You are paralyzed by Bush derangement syndrome. You really are a fry short of a happy meal.

[OGShocker]

Anyone who isn't blowing Bush is an ahole. We'll talk more after you have swallowed it all.
You don't understand that it doesn't take much to make the Bush admin look bad. You need some new material. Your retarded sevant, ignorant moran is worn out.
When you or anyone else resorts lewd mindless posts to support their position, they loose.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

9/11 couldn't have been prevented with any of the information that Bush had at the time. Was Bush supposed to close every airport upon receiving the Al Queda memo?
The blame for 9/11 rests with those sand niggers that took over the planes not the administration at the time. NO I'm not a Bush sympathizer by any means, I just think that the blame needs to be pointed in the right direction. The 9/11 commission came up with the same conclusion.
Now had the Bush administration received a memo stating a time and place then that would of been a different story.
I think we need to change our foreign policy. Make it a policy to not allow foreigners into this country. ;)
I agree with every thing you've said. Blame lies exactly where you've placed it.
Funny...I am the first to rag on W for many of his domestic spending programs but I am just a Bush bot...
Umm...yeah right.
Tools like you are all the same. You spout some insane bullshit you gleaned off some nutjob website and when called on it, you deflect deflect deflect.
You are paralyzed by Bush derangement syndrome. You really are a fry short of a happy meal.
Again, you are in need of some new material. Since you are unable to can't speak intelligently I suggest that you say nothing.

[Old Texan]

lewd
Aside from the point of the thread, there is just something so risque and sexy about the word......Lewd:devil:
A favorite line from Tombstone, Doc to Kate: "Why Kate, you're not wearing a bustle......How Lewd." :D
I tell ya that line will getcha laid........:devil:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

When you or anyone else resorts lewd mindless posts to support their position, they loose.
OG,
Please accept my apology for the tastless comment. I am much better off ignoring nfe.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Since I've already blown my 10 word limit, I guess I'll just answer the silly a$$ question this thred poses. She is working for this administration (and taking an enormous pay cut) for the same reason I would work for it, just like I would have gladly taken a Clinton Administration appointment, just like I would have worked for Al Gore and I would work for Hillery, Obama, Rudy, Romney, or any other Presidential Administration, FOR THE CHANCE TO SERVE MY COUNTRY! TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, TO BE A PART OF RUNNING THE GREATEST NATION STATE ON EARTH. In the course of my career I have met with 5 members of congress, and 3 Presidential cabinet members. Some of them were right wingers and at least 3 of them were far left wingers. If any of them would have asked me to head a project (a couple acually did) for them I would have (and did) gladly done so to the best of my ability. Not for them, but for my Country and for the chance to play an increased role in something much larger than just myself and my immediate family.
Do you know who Cordell Hull and Edward Stettinius Jr. were??? Of course not. They were just the 2 men who served as America's chief diplomats (Secs of State) during WWII. Hardly anyone remembers them, but they no doubt made a big difference in all our lives. Sec Rice has been given the chance to do that job and like any loyal Americian (with a CV like hers) she has taken it. That's why she is "hanging out with these folks".

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Since I've already blown my 10 word limit, I guess I'll just answer the silly a$$ question this thred poses. She is working for this administration (and taking an enormous pay cut) for the same reason I would work for it, just like I would have gladly taken a Clinton Administration appointment, just like I would have worked for Al Gore and I would work for Hillery, Obama, Rudy, Romney, or any other Presidential Administration, FOR THE CHANCE TO SERVE MY COUNTRY! TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, TO BE A PART OF RUNNING THE GREATEST NATION STATE ON EARTH. In the course of my career I have met with 5 members of congress, and 3 Presidential cabinet members. Some of them were right wingers and at least 3 of them were far left wingers. If any of them would have asked me to head a project (a couple acually did) for them I would have (and did) gladly done so to the best of my ability. Not for them, but for my Country and for the chance to play an increased role in something much larger than just myself and my immediate family.
Do you know who Cordell Hull and Edward Stettinius Jr. were??? Of course not. They were just the 2 men who served as America's chief diplomats (Secs of State) during WWII. Hardly anyone remembers them, but they no doubt made a big difference in all our lives. Sec Rice has been given the chance to do that job and like any loyal Americian (with a CV like hers) she has taken it. That's why she is "hanging out with these folks".
I understand this ES and agree with most of it. I guess it struck as nerve when I heard Condi that didn't remember if she had discussed obvious National Security issues with the President. It sounded like she was trying to cover Bush's behind. Condi is bright and capable and her sexuality is moot.
Like I said, some of her comments to the 9/11 committee struck a nerve. In a couple of the clips she sounded like Alberto Gonzales.

[eliminatedsprinter]

I understand this ES and agree with most of it. I guess it struck as nerve when I heard Condi that didn't remember if she had discussed obvious National Security issues with the President. It sounded like she was trying to cover Bush's behind. Condi is bright and capable and her sexuality is moot.
Like I said, some of her comments to the 9/11 committee struck a nerve. In a couple of the clips she sounded like Alberto Gonzales.
I'll bet that she remembered all the breifings after 911, but I would not go out on a limb and try to trust my memory on the details of the routine breifings prior to 911 if I were her either. Keep in mind those polititions were looking for nothing but scapegoats. One misrememberd statement and she would be called a lier by all the Dems and most of the media. If I were in her shoes, talking to those people, I would not admit to remembering my name, unless I had it written in front of me and them.

[Old Texan]

I'll bet that she remembered all the breifings after 911, but I would not go out on a limb and try to trust my memory on the details of the routine breifings prior to 911 if I were her either. Keep in mind those polititions were looking for nothing but scapegoats. One misrememberd statement and she would be called a lier by all the Dems and most of the media. If I were in her shoes, talking to those people, I would not admit to remembering my name, unless I had it written in front of me and them.
Kinda like what happened to Scooter?????:eek:

[never_fast_enuf]

I guess it struck as nerve when I heard Condi that didn't remember if she had discussed obvious National Security issues with the President. It sounded like she was trying to cover Bush's behind..
You are such a tool. That isn't at all what she said but because you hate all things Bush, it is what you heard. Again, you wonder why I treat you like the ignorant fool you are?
Even when the transcript of the conversation is put right in front of your face you still refuse to read the words, instead you cling to your obviously WRONG interpretaion. That makes you a fool...and not an honest one either.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

You are such a tool. That isn't at all what she said but because you hate all things Bush, it is what you heard. Again, you wonder why I treat you like the ignorant fool you are?
Even when the transcript of the conversation is put right in front of your face you still refuse to read the words, instead you cling to your obviously WRONG interpretaion. That makes you a fool...and not an honest one either.
You interpret this statement in any context you'd like
RICE:
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about

[never_fast_enuf]

You interpret this statement in any context you'd like
RICE:
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about
There is no other interpretation other than her ANSWERING a question, actually more of an insinuation from that asshole democrat. THAT is why you still refuse to put the whole exchange out there.
You are either dumb as a rock or satisfied to ignore the truth. Which is it?
BEN-VENISTE. Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the Aug. 6 P.D.B. warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that P.D.B.
RICE. I believe the title was Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside the United States. Now, the P.D.B. -
BEN-VENISTE. Thank you.
RICE. No, Mr. Ben-Veniste -
BEN-VENISTE. I will get into the -
RICE. I would like to finish my point here.
BEN-VENISTE. I didn't know there was a point.
RICE. Given that - you asked me whether or not it warned of attacks.
BEN-VENISTE. I asked you what the title was.
RICE. You said did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States.
BEN-VENISTE. Now, you knew by August 2001 of al Qaeda involvement in the first World Trade Center bombing. Is that correct? You knew that in 1999, late '99, in the millennium threat period, that we had thwarted an al Qaeda attempt to blow up Los Angeles International Airport and thwarted cells operating in Brooklyn, N.Y. and Boston, Mass. as of the Aug. 6 briefing. You learned that al Qaeda members have resided or traveled to the United States for years and maintained a support system in the United States. And you learned that F.B.I. information since the 1998 blind sheik warning of hijackings to free the blind sheik indicated a pattern of suspicious activity in the country up until Aug. 6 consistent with preparation for hijackings. Isn't that so?
RICE. Do you have other questions that you want me to answer as a part of the sequence?
BEN-VENISTE. Well, did you not - you have indicated here that this was some historical document. And I am asking you whether it is not the case that you learned in the P.D.B. memo of Aug. 6 that the F.B.I. was saying that it had information suggesting that preparations, not historically, but ongoing, along with these numerous full field investigations against al Qaeda cells, that preparations were being made consistent with hijackings within the United States.
RICE. What the Aug. 6 P.D.B. said - and perhaps I should read it to you.
BEN-VENISTE. We would be happy to have it declassified in full at this time, including its title.
RICE. I believe - I believe, Mr. Ben-Veniste, that you've had access to this P.D.B.
BEN-VENISTE. But we have not had it declassified so that it can be shown publicly, as you know.
RICE. But let me just - I believe you've had access to this P.D.B. - exceptional access. But let me address your question.

[never_fast_enuf]

BEN-VENISTE. Nor could we, prior to today, reveal the title of that P.D.B.
RICE. May I - may I address the question, sir? The fact is that this Aug. 6 P.D.B. was in response to the president's questions about whether or not something might happen or something might be planned by al Qaeda inside the United States. He asked because all of the threat reporting, or the threat reporting that was actionable, was about the threats abroad, not about the United States. This particular P.D.B. had a long section on what bin Laden had wanted to do, speculative, much of it - in '97, '98, that he had in fact liked the results of the 1993 bombing. It had a number of discussions of - it had a discussion of whether or not they might use hijacking to try and free a prisoner who was being held in the United States - Rassam. It reported that the F.B.I. had full field investigations underway. And we checked on the issue of whether or not there was something going on with surveillance of buildings. And we were told, I believe, that the issue was the courthouse in which this might take place. Commissioner, this was not a warning. This was a historic memo - historical memo prepared by the agency because the president was asking questions about what we knew about the inside. Now, we had already taken -
BEN-VENISTE. Well, if you were willing - if you were willing to declassify that document, then others can make up their minds about it. Let me ask you a general matter, beyond the fact that this memorandum provided information, not speculative but based on intelligence information, that bin Laden had threatened to attack the United States and specifically Washington, D.C. There was nothing reassuring, was there, in that P.D.B.?
RICE. Certainly not. There was nothing reassuring. But I can also tell you that there was nothing in this memo that suggested that an attack was coming on New York or Washington, D.C. There was nothing in this memo as to time, place, how or where. This was not a threat report to the president or a threat report to me. As a matter of -
BEN-VENISTE. We agree that there were no specifics. Let me move on if I may.
RICE. Well - there were no specifics and in fact the country had already taken steps, through the F.A.A., to warn of potential hijackings. The country had already taken steps, through the F.B.I., to task their 56 field offices to increase their activity. The country had taken the steps that it could, given that there was no threat reporting about what might happen inside the United States.
BEN-VENISTE. We have explored that and we will continue to with respect to the muscularity and the specifics of those efforts. The president was in Crawford, Tex., at the time he received the P.D.B. You were not with him. Correct?
RICE. That's correct.
BEN-VENISTE. Now, was the president, in words or substance, alarmed in any way or motivated to take any action such as meeting with the director of the F.B.I., meeting with the attorney general, as a result of receiving the information contained in the P.D.B.?

[ULTRA26 # 1]

BEN-VENISTE. Nor could we, prior to today, reveal the title of that P.D.B.
RICE. May I - may I address the question, sir? The fact is that this Aug. 6 P.D.B. was in response to the president's questions about whether or not something might happen or something might be planned by al Qaeda inside the United States. He asked because all of the threat reporting, or the threat reporting that was actionable, was about the threats abroad, not about the United States. This particular P.D.B. had a long section on what bin Laden had wanted to do, speculative, much of it - in '97, '98, that he had in fact liked the results of the 1993 bombing. It had a number of discussions of - it had a discussion of whether or not they might use hijacking to try and free a prisoner who was being held in the United States - Rassam. It reported that the F.B.I. had full field investigations underway. And we checked on the issue of whether or not there was something going on with surveillance of buildings. And we were told, I believe, that the issue was the courthouse in which this might take place. Commissioner, this was not a warning. This was a historic memo - historical memo prepared by the agency because the president was asking questions about what we knew about the inside. Now, we had already taken -
BEN-VENISTE. Well, if you were willing - if you were willing to declassify that document, then others can make up their minds about it. Let me ask you a general matter, beyond the fact that this memorandum provided information, not speculative but based on intelligence information, that bin Laden had threatened to attack the United States and specifically Washington, D.C. There was nothing reassuring, was there, in that P.D.B.?
RICE. Certainly not. There was nothing reassuring. But I can also tell you that there was nothing in this memo that suggested that an attack was coming on New York or Washington, D.C. There was nothing in this memo as to time, place, how or where. This was not a threat report to the president or a threat report to me. As a matter of -
BEN-VENISTE. We agree that there were no specifics. Let me move on if I may.
RICE. Well - there were no specifics and in fact the country had already taken steps, through the F.A.A., to warn of potential hijackings. The country had already taken steps, through the F.B.I., to task their 56 field offices to increase their activity. The country had taken the steps that it could, given that there was no threat reporting about what might happen inside the United States.
BEN-VENISTE. We have explored that and we will continue to with respect to the muscularity and the specifics of those efforts. The president was in Crawford, Tex., at the time he received the P.D.B. You were not with him. Correct?
RICE. That's correct.
BEN-VENISTE. Now, was the president, in words or substance, alarmed in any way or motivated to take any action such as meeting with the director of the F.B.I., meeting with the attorney general, as a result of receiving the information contained in the P.D.B.?
What is your interpretation of this comment
RICE:
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about

[eliminatedsprinter]

What is your interpretation of this comment
RICE:
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about
Hmmmmmm, perhaps it means she did not remember being told that al Qaeda cells were something they needed to to something about...:rolleyes: It is only an answer to an idiotic pointed question, posed by a political hack, with a partisian agenda, during a phoney political dog and poney show. Why are you troubled by it??? I am more troubled by the fact that congress was using such cheesy political theater to tie up our top officials time, during such serious times.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Sec Rice is an expert on international affairs. If I was President I would have placed her as Sec of State and Gen Powell as National Security advisor. But that does not take into account of the reality that Gen Powell was the bigger name and he may have wanted to have been sec of State. Gen Powell made it clear that he only wanted to serve for 1 term. President Bush needed to place Dr Rice somewhere, so he placed her as National Security Advisor. If I was President, I would have made her Undersecretary of State, then Sec of State, and by now she would be VP. But that is just me. I don't think any National Security Advisor could have prevented 911. So the results of that Dog and Poney Show are irrellevant to me.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Hmmmmmm, perhaps it means she did not remember being told that al Qaeda cells were something they needed to to something about...:rolleyes: It is only an answer to an idiotic pointed question, posed by a political hack, with a partisian agenda, during a phoney political dog and poney show. Why are you troubled by it??? I am more troubled by the fact that congress was using such cheesy political theater to tie up our top officials time, during such serious times.
Sorry but I have a difficult time believing this thus my comment.
I don't view the 9/11 commission as a dog and pony show. Hopefully we learned something from the whole exercise.
Sec Rice is an expert on international affairs. If I was President I would have placed her as Sec of State and Gen Powell as National Security advisor. But that does not take into account of the reality that Gen Powell was the bigger name and he may have wanted to have been sec of State. Gen Powell made it clear that he only wanted to serve for 1 term. President Bush needed to place Dr Rice somewhere, so he placed her as National Security Advisor. If I was President, I would have made her Undersecretary of State, then Sec of State, and by now she would be VP. But that is just me. I don't think any National Security Advisor could have prevented 911. So the results of that Dog and Poney Show are irrellevant to me.
I agree that a National Security Adviser could not have prevented 9/11.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Sorry but I have a difficult time believing this thus my comment.
I don't view the 9/11 commission as a dog and pony show. Hopefully we learned something from the whole exercise.
I agree that a National Security Adviser could not have prevented 9/11.
I actually think it was a rather benign response to a meaningless question, thus I really don't have a problem with it. Like I said, all I read into it, is that she chose to give a "safe answer" to a hostile partisian questioner. When in doubt, that is what any smart person would do. To do otherwise would be foolish.
We learned (actually further learned) what a waste of time these "public hearings" are. They always wind up turning political and never help in the production of the report.

[never_fast_enuf]

Ultra, why is it that you refuse to take the entire exchange into consideration instead of pulling one quote out and asking for it to stand on it's own? Clearly you are trying to take it out of context. Are you not interested in honest debate? Your instance to not look at the entire exchange pretty much exposes you for what you are.
Her answer was a bit of a smart ass answer but the tail hole doing the asking wasn't interested in anything other than political one-upsmanship.
I would think by now you could distinguish what a smart assed answer is to a question asked by a liberal.;)

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Ultra, why is it that you refuse to take the entire exchange into consideration instead of pulling one quote out and asking for it to stand on it's own? Clearly you are trying to take it out of context. Are you not interested in honest debate? Your instance to not look at the entire exchange pretty much exposes you for what you are.
Her answer was a bit of a smart ass answer but the tail hole doing the asking wasn't interested in anything other than political one-upsmanship.
I would think by now you could distinguish what a smart assed answer is to a question asked by a liberal.;)
RICE:
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about
It was a smart assed answer to a question asked by a liberal? You aren't helping your cause with an answer like that.

[eliminatedsprinter]

RICE:
But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about
It was a smart assed answer to a question asked by a liberal? You aren't helping your cause with an answer like that.
Sec Rice would be the first to say it was not a smart ass answer.
Like I said, it was a safe/begnign answer. The only kind one can or should give under such politically charged and desultory circumstances.:idea:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Sec Rice would be the first to say it was not a smart ass answer.
Like I said, it was a safe/begnign answer. The only kind one can or should give under such politically charged and desultory circumstances.:idea:
ES, I understand your point completely. However this, in my opinion, wasn't a safe/begnign answer.

[eliminatedsprinter]

ES, I understand your point completely. However this, in my opinion, wasn't a safe/begnign answer.
That is your right.
The fact that she is still in office and she still commands far more respect from the administration's opponents than any other current member of President Bush's "inner circle" tends to imply otherwise. If there was a major problem with it the press and the Dems would be all over it 24/7.:)