January 19, 2005

• holy fuck... i like this Boxer lady. No matter what your politics are, i think you'll have to agree that's a helluva smack to lay down on anyone as tough as Condi Rice!
• Whoa, Sen. Boxer's opening statement weighs in at 2125 words -- that's a mouthful. And damn right, nice to see Boxer cut to the chase.
• And if you're going to become the voice of diplomacy -- this is just a helpful point -- when Senator Voinovich mentioned the issue of tsunami relief, you said -- your first words were, "The tsunami was a wonderful opportunity for us." Now, the tsunami was one of the worst tragedies of our lifetime -- one of the worst -- and it's going to have a 10-year impact on rebuilding that area. I was very disappointed in your statement. WHAM!!
• Damn, they're fiesty! Kos had some comments about how this Condi-Boxer smackdown (as you my dear so eloquently put it) is extra interesting... Boxer may have recently had a landslide re-election, but Feinstein's seat very well might be replaced in 2010 (i think?) by none other than Condi herself. And that makes this shit personal. Kos also has Boxer's, erm, "comments" on Gonzales. ...I am very troubled by [Gonzales'] record, if you will, on the whole issue of torture and trying to come up with a rationale. So I would say I am leaning no on him at this point because I saw those pictures and they haunt me. I'll never get them out of my mind, and I couldn't even sit and watch all of them. So that's there. But I want to stick to stick to the Dr. Rice subject because I think that this New York Times piece [that'd be this one - anyone have a good login?] is exactly proving the point that I've been making, which is that people in this administration just say, 'Well, this is what we did and we did it and we are strong and, if it goes wrong, that's life.' That is just not right, because as I say, I have the most people killed --a quarter of those who have died in Iraq come from my state -- and I can not let this thing go. ))) for Boxer.
• ...But I want to stick to stick to the Dr. Rice subject... Um... sic.
• Rahhhh! EVERYONE in the country should read this. Now, too bad we can't nail the Biggest Liar of the bunch. Then impeach the bastard.
• Good for her. hope we can once and for all stop giving people a free pass b/c they are female and/or a racial minority -- Evil is evil. It should be obvious to everyone by now that the "old white men" sterotype is decades out of date and repubs are smart enough to employ Uncle Toms/Aunt Tinas/Tio Albertos to serve their purposes. And can Boxer pls be the first female prez and not "kill all the immigrants" veering ever closer to fascism Hillary?
• Well, lessee.. Daily Show aired at 11pm EST; it's now 7.45am EST; that means it took about 9 hours for us to see ConfirmationVixens.com..
• *Sigh.* I just wish that it mattered, at this point, that we have proof they're a bunch of lying bastards. "I hope you'll refrain from impugning my integrity..." Well, Sen. Boxer wasn't impugning it, YOUR OWN FUCKING QUOTES were impugning it. "Don't imply that I take the truth lightly." Imply nothing. SHE CAN PROVE IT. It seems the facts have an anti-Rice agenda.
• Politicians accusing each other lying is roughly akin to bank robbers accusing each other of nicking the change from their most recent Taco Bell run. But yes, Sen. Boxer delivered a nice burn there, and Ms. Rice promptly hooked herself on it like a hungry bass on a red wiggler. Fact is, Rice should have been ready for a little grandstanding, and wasn't, and made it worse by getting all flibbertygibberty. Par for this administration's course.
• MonkeyFilter: all flibbertygibberty.
• If you need an NYTimes login use loki666 password is the same as the user.
• Side note: why is people's first reaction when someone gets all huffy and says, "Are you callin' me a LIAR?" to back down, even when it's obvious that the person is lying? I mean, Sen. Boxer did a great job, but she could have been a lot meaner on that whole "impugn my integrity" thing. "...don't imply that I take the facts lightly." "Ms. Rice, you DO take the facts lightly, as your previously quoted record shows. I don't have to imply it, it's there in black and white. BEEE-YACH!" Why not call a liar a liar? If you can prove it, why wouldn't it be doable?
• This mornin' on NPR the beat-down continued... I listened during my commute, wishing I could broadcast the whole thing to the entirety of the light-rail car. One of Boxer's comments-- that fully 25% of the American casualties were from California, so she felt compelled to put all of the evidence of pro-war marketing on the record-- really hit home. Yeah, Condi's going to get the job, but she ain't going in with a halo.
• Why not call a liar a liar? If you can prove it, why wouldn't it be doable? Because in Washington, the facts don't matter -- really, they don't. At least not as much as the need to "play ball". We hear about political capital and how much you can spend when. Here in Wisconsin, our Hero Boy Russ Feingold stood up to the Patriot Act -- and thank the gods he did (the only senator with the guts to do so, I would add). But he has to play along with other stuff he might like to object to, because that's how the game is played. This is why John Kerry seems to be coming down with what I'm calling Al Gore Syndrome -- the making of fiery, on-point, 100% correct and fully appropriate incendiary comments after they would do him the most good. In the name of cross-aisle diplomacy, politicians (usually Democrats) feel the need to wobble and hedge their words, rather than speak the honest and unapologetic truth. As a result, the Republicans get to set the flippant tone, avoid responsibility for their hideous lies, and pretend like the rest of the world (and US population) doesn't matter. It's pathetic, but it's reality -- witness Cynthia McKinney. Is it better to stay in office and be a sheepish pawn who makes an occasional fuss, or stand tall and get smoked in your re-election bid? It's a tough call..
• Condi's had some practice distorting the facts to hide that she's doing a bad job. I was at Stanford when she was provost, and rates of tenure for women and blacks were decreasing (they went back up after a scandal/she left). She massaged the data to try to hide the fact that her removal of affirmitive action from the tenure process was hurting women and minorities, but got called on it by several women professors who ended up filing discrimination cases against Stanford. I can assure Feinstein that she need not worry about the female academic vote in California. A couple of interesting quotes from an article about her time at Stanford: "I am myself a beneficiary of a Stanford strategy that took affirmative action seriously, that took a risk in taking a young PhD from the University of Denver," Rice said during a contentious May 1998 meeting of the Faculty Senate, referring to her initial hiring. Asked at that time why she was departing from the practice of applying affirmative action to tenure decisions, Rice responded, "I'm the chief academic officer now" And some words to a professor that criticized a university ad campaign, in phrasing that seems somehow familiar: "Either you're a member of the team, or you're not a member of the team."
• Can somebody explain the political calculus that led all the Dems on the committee, other than Boxer and Kerry, to ask tough questions, and say things like "Your performance here is disappointing, Dr. Rice," but then go right ahead and vote to approve? Where's the "smackdown" in that? I mean, the Dems already tried just going along with Bush during the rush to war with Iraq, and that didn't work. Why not stand up and demand that the Repubs be more accountable for fucking up so badly? I know that "that's politics," but don't the Dems really need to mix things up in terms of how they go about their business?
• How could Bush not make Condi his Secretary of State? Smack.
• on review, that article sucks and the oil tanker is obviously photoshopped. Sorry.