Bush Cabinet changes for second term?

[blackfox]

Does anyone know about any potential reshuffling on Bush's Cabinet for his second term? I remember that Powell and Rice in particular had mentioned that they were not interested in a second term, should Bush be re-elected.

Any idea who is going? When? And potential replacements?

Thanks.

[Thomas Veil]

If Bush truly wants to heal and reunite this nation, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft and Wolfowitz should be shown the door, post haste.

I'm not holding my breath. :rolleyes:

[solvs]

The staff will quit as a show of good will, so they do not have to put the POTUS into the awkward position of having to fire or replace them. Some will be hired back, some will choose to spend time with their families. Some will not want to come back and have their names dragged through the mud knowing what the administration has planned. I doubt Rummie and Rove will go anywhere... they are the administration. Depending on who goes and who stays, we will know what those plans are for better or worse.

[Durandal7]

Powell has been saying for years that he would resign if Bush wins a second term.

There are now reports surfacing that Ashcroft will hand in his resignation in the next few days. My bet is on Attorney General Giuliani in the next term.

[mactastic]

Ashcroft, Ridge, and Powell are all rumored to be leaving. Rumor also has it that Rice want's Rummy's job, but he doesn't want to give it up. Rice is also being mentioned for SecState as well.

[mactastic]

Oh and Tommy Thompson is probably out as well.

[makisushi]

I can't imagine Powell sticking around for much longer. He has aired his dissapointment many times.

[jefhatfield]

abc and cnn have mentioned the obvious changes...rumsfeld, powell, and ashcroft all going out...and the politically exciting, for gop and dems, possibility of rudy giuliani as attorney general...few politicians are so well liked by both sides

before the election, cnn asked him about this and of course he wouldn't say and looked shocked...to me that's a good indication that the former nyc mayor will take ashcroft's job

looking further down the line, with the strong possibility of cheney not running in 08, i think the gop might want to run giuliani for president...with bush in and a move from him to bring the gop to the left and basically abandon the christian right now that he does not need them, i see the gop trying to further their base by wooing moderate, pro choice voters...the social conservatives will be left out in the cold once bush reorganizes his new cabinet and the social conservatives will still be forced to vote for a moderate gop instead of a more liberal democratic party in 08

the christians on the far right can protest and start their own socially conservative party but it won't be enough to effctively compete with the two major parties

[mactastic]

The socially conservative types don't have to vote at all. If they stay home the GOP loses. And if Guilani runs on the GOP ticket they will stay home rather than vote for a pro-choice Republican.

That's sort of the interesting thing about Bush's win, it leaves a vacuum behind him. Cheney is not popular enough to run, and all the other high-profile GOP types are considered RINOs by the rank-and-file of the GOP. I've heard Frist's name floated as a possible '08 candidate, but outside of him I can't think of anyone from the conservative wing of the GOP that would fit the bill. McCain perhaps, but he barely meets the description as is.

Arnold? Maybe, but again he's a social liberal who is pro-choice and at least tolerant of homosexual unions. Plus you would have to get the Constitution amended like now to allow time for Arnold to build the organization necessary for an '08 run.

Jeb Bush? Again, maybe but at some point Americans will get Bush fatigue. '08 probably isn't Jeb's year. '12 maybe.

Perhaps the GOP could run Allen Keyes again. First black on a major ticket. He's got the social conservatism thing sewn up. Unfortunately everyone else hates him.

[IJ Reilly]

Perhaps the GOP could run Allen Keyes again. First black on a major ticket. He's got the social conservatism thing sewn up. Unfortunately everyone else hates him.

As well they should. Did you hear about what he said after his defeat in Illinois?

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-keyes05.html

[mactastic]

As well they should. Did you hear about what he said after his defeat in Illinois?

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-keyes05.html


Yeah he was about as gracious in defeat as they come. :rolleyes:

However, he is much closer to what appears to be the mainstream of the GOP these days than Guilani is.

[jefhatfield]

The socially conservative types don't have to vote at all. If they stay home the GOP loses. And if Guilani runs on the GOP ticket they will stay home rather than vote for a pro-choice Republican.



being a democrat, i wish the gop could lose if one group, like christian conservatives, stayed home

but the truth is, even without the christian conservatives, a moderate gop candidate would still beat any democrat

my party, the democratic party, is in crisis right now and has no real agenda to take america forward

the dems are in the same position the gop was in the 92 and 96 elections...basically directionless...the gop is so far ahead right now that they can win on a born again christian, social conservative platform or a fiscal conservative, social liberal platform...i think 2008 belongs to them if they run a guiliani or condi rice

but since the gop is ahead today...remember they won by a large 3.3 million votes this time...they might get complacent and the democrats can come from behind and surprise everybody in 2008...in 1991 when george hw bush had a 90% percent approval rating (no president in history has ever been so popular with america), the gop seemed invincible...by november 1992, the gop was history and bill clinton took the white house

for the sake of the democrats, i hope the gop stays with the ultra, ultra conservative platform and alienates anyone who is not 100% percent fundamentalist or 100% percent super-rich...that way, the democrats will be able to win in 2008 ;)

[blackfox]

Two interesting posts back-to-back...

I tend to think that for sheer pragmatism, the GOP is likely to pursue a strategy as outlined by Jef, even if it does potentially alienate some constituency.

Mac, I understand your point, but it hinges largely on what constitutes a "social conservative".

In defining them as synonomous with the religious right, I do not think that they will prove decisive. Surprisingly, from what I read, the evangelicals and there ilk were not a factor in this recent election, as their numbers at the polls remained more or less unchanged from 2000.

If you define "social conservatives" with a broader brush, then I believe the case you state is not as plausible. Much depends on what else is dangled by the GOP Candidate in 2008, his character and the Democratic opposition.

The opposition to abortion may already be a moot point, however, if Bush manages to either gut/circumvent Roe vs Wade or overturn it by 2008.

[mactastic]

My understanding was that some 24% of the Ohio electorate described themselves as 'evangelical' this time around.

[pseudobrit]

I'm a bit confused but ultimately frightened by the GOP strategy.

If they'd nominated McCain in 2000, he'd have easily won. But he would have brought a moderate, cooperative government to DC.

I fear the party has been hijacked by extremists.

They'd rather pass on the easy win with a moderate candidate and instead they'll run hard-line rightist fundamentalists (i.e. Bush) and hope to win by a squeak (or by cheating).

[Mike Teezie]

I'm a bit confused but ultimately frightened by the GOP strategy.

If they'd nominated McCain in 2000, he'd have easily won. But he would have brought a moderate, cooperative government to DC.

I fear the party has been hijacked by extremists.

They'd rather pass on the easy win with a moderate candidate and instead they'll run hard-line rightist fundamentalists (i.e. Bush) and hope to win by a squeak (or by cheating).

And that's what I don't understand about this administration. What good does that do anybody? Even them?

Even with a moderate in the WH, they would still be in power.

[IJ Reilly]

The hard Right is in charge of the GOP now in precisely the same way the furtherest Left elements called all the shots in the Democratic Party during the 1970s. Not only are they leading their party away from the mainstream of American politics, they are accelerating an ideological cleansing campaign within their own power structure. The impetus for this seems to be coming from both the top and bottom of the party, and will make it increasingly difficult for Republicans to field genuinely moderate candidates for any important office.

[jefhatfield]

as we now know, two of W's far right cabinet members resigned today...john ashcroft and don evans...both born again christians and among the most hated by the left and moderates

the only real representative remaining of the president's evangelical base, who is publicly christian and outspoken, is justice clarence thomas...and since he is not a cabinet member and will likely stay for some years to come, bush can still influence the court for years, especially under a thomas-led supreme court when rehnquist resigns due to bad health as court watchers predict...i don't see an overturn or roe v. wade, but for bush to still stack the court with someone slightly on the conservative side...a far right justice would not pass the mustard at this time

today's two key cabinet resignations are no surprise as key political experts believe bush will push the moderates into power...this may become the opening for mayor giuliani, a social moderate

for us democrats on this thread, the gop's look to the future and a moderate led party is sure to make beating a gop candidate for the white house very hard in four years...i have no strategy against a moderate gop right now

we can attack bush on the war, but rummy will step down once iraq is more stabilized and when the us troops come home, and then the president will accentuate all the positives in such a way people will forget that we had an unsuccessful occupation over there

if bush puts in a moderate sectretary of defense in rummy's place, and not hardliner wolfowitz, the dems may not be able to attack W's war policies

from now on, bush will try and attract the "blue" state voters who were against him and try and go down in history as a strong and popular president like clinton and reagan

you can't please everybody all the time but reagan and clinton were not bad at it and the bush spin staff are probably hard at work in making the president enter his second term with a strong agenda to unite the country and heal its wounds...but instead of real healing, it will be a pr campaign

[Thomas Veil]

...and there are some familiar faces.

http://users.adelphia.net/~tjveil/images/Bushcabinet.jpg

[Chip NoVaMac]

I'm a bit confused but ultimately frightened by the GOP strategy.

If they'd nominated McCain in 2000, he'd have easily won. But he would have brought a moderate, cooperative government to DC.

I fear the party has been hijacked by extremists.

They'd rather pass on the easy win with a moderate candidate and instead they'll run hard-line rightist fundamentalists (i.e. Bush) and hope to win by a squeak (or by cheating).

I personally have said more than one that if McCain was on the RNC ticket, I would have voted for him over Gore or Kerry.

It is not that I am "moderate" Democrat, I am a fiscal responsible citizen; and i would have hoped that McCain would have been able to bring the nation to their senses.

[jefhatfield]

I personally have said more than one that if McCain was on the RNC ticket, I would have voted for him over Gore or Kerry.

It is not that I am "moderate" Democrat, I am a fiscal responsible citizen; and i would have hoped that McCain would have been able to bring the nation to their senses.

i want my democrats to do well, but more importantly, i want the united states to be a fiscally conservative country and i would also vote for mccain knowing what i do about his honor and true dedication to balancing the budget

if we had a balanced budget and spent our money wisely, i believe it is possible for the country to have a fiscal conservative politicain, whether it's a mccain or was someone like clinton (who put us in surplus mode), and still take care of the homeless situation, healthcare, and education

i know a lot of people who preach fiscal conservatism but don't practice it themselves in their life...that's where it starts, with the individual...if most republicans, personally and individually practiced what they preached, then they would never allow a mad spender like gwb to regain the white house

i don't wear designer clothes, i don't eat out a lot, i refused to take out a major school loan for grad school, i drive a 20 year old car, i like fine wine but have the sense to realize i can't afford it and make do with cheaper wine, and i make do with older computers, too ;) ...i accentuate the positives and realize as a world citizen...that having food, shelter, an education past the 8th grade, and not having the federales shake you down already puts one among the most affluent and fortunate citizens in the world...america uses 20-25% percent of the world's resources yet only has 5% percent of the world's population

ask yourself the mac user fiscal conservative question, "if i don't need a powerbook, can i survive with an ibook or do i have to get that powerbook!!" :)

[Chip NoVaMac]

i want my democrats to do well, but more importantly, i want the united states to be a fiscally conservative country and i would also vote for mccain knowing what i do about his honor and true dedication to balancing the budget

if we had a balanced budget and spent our money wisely, i believe it is possible for the country to have a fiscal conservative politicain, whether it's a mccain or was someone like clinton (who put us in surplus mode), and still take care of the homeless situation, healthcare, and education

i know a lot of people who preach fiscal conservatism but don't practice it themselves in their life...that's where it starts, with the individual...if most republicans, personally and individually practiced what they preached, then they would never allow a mad spender like gwb to regain the white house

i don't wear designer clothes, i don't eat out a lot, i refused to take out a major school loan for grad school, i drive a 20 year old car, i like fine wine but have the sense to realize i can't afford it and make do with cheaper wine, and i make do with older computers, too ;) ...i accentuate the positives and realize as a world citizen...that having food, shelter, an education past the 8th grade, and not having the federales shake you down already puts one among the most affluent and fortunate citizens in the world...america uses 20-25% percent of the world's resources yet only has 5% percent of the world's population

ask yourself the mac user fiscal conservative question, "if i don't need a powerbook, can i survive with an ibook or do i have to get that powerbook!!" :)

Oh so true! My other half loves buying stuff at the grocery store that is ready to go. The latest is Manwich that comes with the meat with it! Man, as I told him if we can't find 10 to 20 minutes to prep a meal, then we are lost. Slow cooking is now a way of life for us.

I have just gotten my boss to agree to just two days a week in the main office. Otherwise I work from home.

[Xtremehkr]

Colin Powell is meeting with the President right now, we should find out today whether or not he is staying.

Michael Powell is staying, no surprise there, it's probably the best job he will ever have and being loyal to Bush is probably his best course of action.

[Chip NoVaMac]

Colin Powell is meeting with the President right now, we should find out today whether or not he is staying.

Michael Powell is staying, no surprise there, it's probably the best job he will ever have and being loyal to Bush is probably his best course of action.

You are so right. For most that have held his position, it has been a rubber stamp type of job. It appears that he has his sights on higher opportunities.

[Sun Baked]

President Bush has chosen White House counsel Alberto Gonzales (http://pview.findlaw.com/view/1505800_1?channel=LP), a Texas confidant and the most prominent Hispanic in the administration, to succeed Attorney General John Ashcroft, sources close to the White House said today.

[skunk]

That couldn't be the same Alberto Gonzales who advised that cokehead in the White House that ignoring the Geneva Convention was perfectly OK - and anyway what could anybody else do about it? - could it? :mad:

[Sun Baked]

That couldn't be the same Alberto Gonzales who advised that cokehead in the White House that ignoring the Geneva Convention was perfectly OK - and anyway what could anybody else do about it? - could it? :mad:According to the expanded article over at law.com (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1099927170858) -- yes...

Sort of shocking that this was also a possible Supreme Court candidate. :eek:

[skunk]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED etc... :mad:

[Xtremehkr]

Well, we may have gone from bad to worse, and this may indicate that Bush intends to start convicting and killing terrorists. No more of those "quaint" Geneva Conventions to worry about.

The Whitehouse is selling Ashcroft as the best GA ever, what a farce.

[IJ Reilly]

Somebody seems to have harbored the illusion that Ashcroft would be replaced by a moderate. Pray tell, why?

[jefhatfield]

Well, we may have gone from bad to worse, and this may indicate that Bush intends to start convicting and killing terrorists. No more of those "quaint" Geneva Conventions to worry about.

The Whitehouse is selling Ashcroft as the best GA ever, what a farce.

the press seems to think that from sources close to ashcroft and the president believe that ashcroft was politely booted for being too conservative...bush needs to capture the moderates to secure his place in history as a great president, not a divider of america

as for any viable attorney generals/conservatives being more conservative than ashcroft, i don't think that's really possible

bush is going to clean house of those ultra conservatives and/or perceived warmongers that made liberals attack him...liberals don't mind condi rice or michael powell that much so they will probably stay

at the end of 2004, it may be too late for bush to be a real people pleaser in the mold of a reagan or a clinton...bush should have played up the middle sooner and not have been so hard headed

[Xtremehkr]

the press seems to think that from sources close to ashcroft and the president believe that ashcroft was politely booted for being too conservative...bush needs to capture the moderates to secure his place in history as a great president, not a divider of america

as for any viable attorney generals/conservatives being more conservative than ashcroft, i don't think that's really possible

bush is going to clean house of those ultra conservatives and/or perceived warmongers that made liberals attack him...liberals don't mind condi rice or michael powell that much so they will probably stay

at the end of 2004, it may be too late for bush to be a real people pleaser in the mold of a reagan or a clinton...bush should have played up the middle sooner and not have been so hard headed

I don' know about, Bush is a lame duck President and so there is no need for him to pander to anyone. Alberto G was announced very very quickly. And he is sympathetic to the Administrations position of treatment of POWs (enemy combatants, whatever we are calling them now.) And he is Latino, which helps.

Given the Conservative Agenda (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4162182) that is expected during this term, it seems like Ashcroft would have been right where he wanted to be.

We may never know, but we will find out what kind of person Alberto G is going to be.

[jefhatfield]

I don' know about, Bush is a lame duck President and so there is no need for him to pander to anyone. Alberto G was announced very very quickly. And he is sympathetic to the Administrations position of treatment of POWs (enemy combatants, whatever we are calling them now.) And he is Latino, which helps.

Given the Conservative Agenda (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4162182) that is expected during this term, it seems like Ashcroft would have been right where he wanted to be.

We may never know, but we will find out what kind of person Alberto G is going to be.

the new attorney general is a social moderate but his stance on prisoners/POWs is disturbing but not really an issue so much in the right wing vs. left wing mold

again, bush chooses a minority for a high profile job in an attempt to convince america he is somehow a progressive president...it's all a weak smoke screen and being a minority myself, i am not fooled by W's appointments and most minorities i have met are unconvinced of the president's so called inclusiveness

[Chip NoVaMac]

I don' know about, Bush is a lame duck President and so there is no need for him to pander to anyone. Alberto G was announced very very quickly. And he is sympathetic to the Administrations position of treatment of POWs (enemy combatants, whatever we are calling them now.) And he is Latino, which helps.

Given the Conservative Agenda (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4162182) that is expected during this term, it seems like Ashcroft would have been right where he wanted to be.

We may never know, but we will find out what kind of person Alberto G is going to be.

Not that quickly. Ashcroft gave his resignation on Election Day. So there was time to give serrious thought as to whom to replace him.

[Lyle]

Not that quickly. Ashcroft gave his resignation on Election Day. So there was time to give serrious thought as to whom to replace him.I don't think Gonzales was his first choice. Up until the announcement, there was a lot of speculation (see e.g. this story (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,780497,00.html)) that former Deputy AG Larry Thompson was the President's first pick. I suppose he would have been the first black AG.

[Xtremehkr]

the new attorney general is a social moderate but his stance on prisoners/POWs is disturbing but not really an issue so much in the right wing vs. left wing mold

again, bush chooses a minority for a high profile job in an attempt to convince america he is somehow a progressive president...it's all a weak smoke screen and being a minority myself, i am not fooled by W's appointments and most minorities i have met are unconvinced of the president's so called inclusiveness

I agree, the minority appointments are a means to an ends. None of his minority appointments are ever mentioned by the groups that they supposedly hail from. I think for the most part they are working purely in their own interests and are using it to their advantage.

Albert is being sold as a social moderate but he doesn't make the laws, he enforces them, at the Presidents direction. Congress makes the laws, the judicial system enforces them, and the Attorney General does what the President tells him to do.

With the agenda that has been set, it makes very little difference what his personal views are as long as he does what he is told to do, right?

[jefhatfield]

I agree, the minority appointments are a means to an ends. None of his minority appointments are ever mentioned by the groups that they supposedly hail from. I think for the most part they are working purely in their own interests and are using it to their advantage.

Albert is being sold as a social moderate but he doesn't make the laws, he enforces them, at the Presidents direction. Congress makes the laws, the judicial system enforces them, and the Attorney General does what the President tells him to do.

With the agenda that has been set, it makes very little difference what his personal views are as long as he does what he is told to do, right?

there are truly enough ultra conservative asians, african-americans, and hispanics that bush can round up and put on his staff and in the courts...but don't be fooled by the color of one's skin...look at their record and what they stand for--do they stand for the greater good of the majority of americans or are they on the fringes of the lunatic left or lunatic right?

at least the new attorney general is criticized by the religious right so at least this post has been a move, maybe very very small, towards the moderate side of things...bush cannot have a third term so this second and last term is his chance to make history and make a good name for himself

no president wants to be seen as someone who appealed only to one extreme wing of one party

[solvs]

Somebody seems to have harbored the illusion that Ashcroft would be replaced by a moderate. Pray tell, why?
I think it was more about hope than actually believing it was going to happen. We now know that Bush intends to staff more yes-men (or in Condi's case, yes-women). So much for reaching out to the critics and going more moderate. And this is only the beginning. It's only going to get worse from here. Look what they're doing to Arlen Specter.

Next up, Ultra Neo-Conservative judges.

[Chip NoVaMac]

I agree, the minority appointments are a means to an ends. None of his minority appointments are ever mentioned by the groups that they supposedly hail from. I think for the most part they are working purely in their own interests and are using it to their advantage.

Albert is being sold as a social moderate but he doesn't make the laws, he enforces them, at the Presidents direction. Congress makes the laws, the judicial system enforces them, and the Attorney General does what the President tells him to do.

With the agenda that has been set, it makes very little difference what his personal views are as long as he does what he is told to do, right?

You have a point. Does Ms. Rice advance the African-American (black) role model?

[Backtothemac]

You have a point. Does Ms. Rice advance the African-American (black) role model?

Lets see, her family hails from Alabama, her family were sharecroppers. Her grandfather decided to get an education at all costs, got it, and as she said, since then "The Rice family has been educated". So is she a stereotype?

Should she be looked down upon because she is a black republican? Someone who never quit no matter what she was told she could do? Personally, I think she is a role model to all women, not just black women, and futhermore a role model to everyone.

[zimv20]

Should she be looked down upon because she is a black republican?
not at all. i just think she was an incompetent national security director, and don't hold out much hope she'll be any better as sec of state.

[Chip NoVaMac]

Lets see, her family hails from Alabama, her family were sharecroppers. Her grandfather decided to get an education at all costs, got it, and as she said, since then "The Rice family has been educated". So is she a stereotype?

Should she be looked down upon because she is a black republican? Someone who never quit no matter what she was told she could do? Personally, I think she is a role model to all women, not just black women, and futhermore a role model to everyone.

No, she should be looked down upon as being a kiss ass to GWB. Why Powell didn't quit sooner I don't know. Ms. Rice scares me with her personal motives. Powell at least had IMO the good of the Nation at heart.

[Chip NoVaMac]

not at all. i just think she was an incompetent national security director, and don't hold out much hope she'll be any better as sec of state.

Amen, she seems to be a "lacky" that will do anything to stay in the job.

[Backtothemac]

Amen, she seems to be a "lacky" that will do anything to stay in the job.

OMG, have you ever met Condi Chip? I have on multiple occastions. She is very qualified for the positions that she has held.

Masters in Arts from Notre Dame, PHD in Poltitical Science from University of Denver. Provost at Stanford University. She is considered one of the worlds formost experts on foriegn policy. Even by those that don't agree with her views.

You call her a lacky. Dude, that is an insult, to the highest degree. She is a proud, educated, successful black woman. Disagree with her policies if you must, but to call her a lacky.

How does that ignore thing work again here?

[IJ Reilly]

She is considered to be one of the foremost experts on Russia, a subject of decreasing importance in foreign policy today. Be that as it may, Rice has numerous failures to her credit as National Security Advisor, and only one real success as nearly as I can tell, and that is demonstrating a fierce loyalty to George Bush. It's been known about Bush since day one that he prizes personal loyalty above all else, so the elevation of Rice is about a predictable as the rising sun. It also does little or nothing to increase the diversity of voices (let alone, dissenting voices) within the administration, which is another criticism that ought to have some resonance, considering how this ideological monoculture played into the deeply flawed Iraq decision-making process. With the Rice appointment, the bubble grows ever smaller.

[Lyle]

Should she be looked down upon because she is a black republican?This is a rhetorical question, right? ;)

[jefhatfield]

OMG, have you ever met Condi Chip? I have on multiple occastions. She is very qualified for the positions that she has held.

Masters in Arts from Notre Dame, PHD in Poltitical Science from University of Denver. Provost at Stanford University. She is considered one of the worlds formost experts on foriegn policy. Even by those that don't agree with her views.

You call her a lacky. Dude, that is an insult, to the highest degree. She is a proud, educated, successful black woman. Disagree with her policies if you must, but to call her a lacky.

How does that ignore thing work again here?

few people in this country have dr. rice's professional, government, and educational background and expertise...so in that sense, bttm, she is no lackey

what i think people are worried about is that she is:

1) W's closest personal friend
2) nsa in a time when all we can see is that we didn't catch bin laden, and there have been no "major" confiscations of wmd's
3) she has no well known points of view different than the president leading many to believe she is a "rubber stamp"

i have no doubt that the gop will have a viable presidential or vice presidential candidate in condi rice in 2008 and the grand move to put dr. rice as sec of state is a platform where she can make a move into the white house four years from now

dr. rice is as qualified as any person that has had her job, but it just seems to obvious that she will not do her job but be a yes-person to gwb and grow her base of support for 2008

what we need from dr. rice is somebody who has their own voice, whether it is in conjuction with the president or not...gwb is just one member of a team of paid civil servants trusted to administer the daily activities of our government and we cannnot have a dr. rice who is there for personal political reasons or to simply be there to say yes to the president

dr. rice needs to do the job of secretary of state, even if it means that she opposes the president from time to time...many will credit nixon as our greatest foreign policy president, but much of that foreign policy greatness historians talk about can be attributed to former secretary of state kissinger

and kissinger was no yes-man for nixon...and because of that, in part, we left vietnam and divided the house of communism, which eventually and inevitably led to the downfall of the iron curtain

let's hope dr. rice can step up to the plate

[Backtothemac]

Jef, I think she can. Personally, I think it is Bush that follows her lead more than her following his.

Condi is just not like that. She is not a yes man, but in fact, is more likely than not the leader of the administrations policies.

[jefhatfield]

You have a point. Does Ms. Rice advance the African-American (black) role model?

as a minority and a democrat, i find it hard to see her as my "hero"...her views are not close to mine or that of most minorities in america

now if dr. rice was secretary of state during the clinton administration, i think she would have much more influence among minorities and women

i think minorities and women will not have a major role model until somebody makes it big in the democratic party...colin powell has been the most successful minority from the gop and only time will tell if america sees dr. rice in the same favorable light

as for powell, i think he has done himself good to be at odds with a president who has a failed war/occupation and a failed economy under his belt...imho, powell is the best republican i have seen in a long time because along with smarts and a great resume, he is his own man and not scared to take calculated chances in a time which needs a leader ready to make hard decisions

if dr. rice does nothing but lie for the president, there is no way moderates like me will even consider putting her into the white house four years from now...if america does better over the next four years and our status as a nation among nations improves due to dr. rice, i may actually jump the party fence and vote for her

[jefhatfield]

Jef, I think she can. Personally, I think it is Bush that follows her lead more than her following his.

Condi is just not like that. She is not a yes man, but in fact, is more likely than not the leader of the administrations policies.

there is no doubt that, behind closed doors, there is a personal friendship between gwb and condi and that she can yell and scream all she wants and oppose him on issues

what bugs me is her public face seems so hidden behind the "party loyalist" persona...she needs to step out of gwb's shadow and be like a henry kissinger even if that makes her look mean and egotistical at times

i think hilary clinton has a better chance at president four years from now because she will not go along with a plan she thinks that will fail...she doesn't have to please anybody but america's best interest

will condi serve gwb and be a protector of the president at state or will she lead the state department and do the job the american people expect of her?...for a better and stronger america who is a team player with all the other countries

[mactastic]

Rice doesn't seem personable enough to make a good SecState. She's got the hard-nosed part down, but a SecState needs to wrap that in a velvet glove. Whatever Condi's qualifications are (and they are many and distinguished), I don't think she has this one. And while she may not be a yes-woman, she is ideologically aligned with the POTUS which means he hears less from people who think different from him.

[Lyle]

Just had to throw this in for fun: The current edition of The Onion (http://www.theonion.com) has a headline reading "Ashcroft Loses Job To Mexican". ;)

[pseudobrit]

She is not a yes man.

I should hope not.

As you've pointed out several times now, she's a black woman.