So sayeth our next Secretary of State, at her senate foreign relations committee lovefest confirmation hearing. We’ll train some Iraqis, and note that the Iraqis problems involve “getting along”, and then we’ll operate in the political interest of the President.
“Doctor” Rice assured the Committee that she will be every bit the loyal yes-woman that she was as National Security Advisor, and we can rest assured, unlike that uppity Colin Powell, she will not rock any boats. She wants the Committee to know she serves the man and his interests– and the nation need not worry that its chief diplomat somehow serves it.
Some of my loyal colleagues of the left may question whether the senate should make a point of blocking the likes of her, or Mr. Gonzales at Justice. My answer is a resounding no: these people are not criminals (compare and contrast “Bernard Kerik”); they are merely disagreeable, and have personality traits (fierce Bush family l oyalty) that will make them awful civil servants, and probably inure to the detriment of the nation. But by the loose standards of “advise and consent”, the President is entitled to his team.
The people have spoken. This is what they want. Let ’em have it. Of course, we’re part of the “’em”, but then, we nominated someone that told us he was more in agreement with the Bush Administration than in disagreement with it, did we not?
So… all hail our next Secretary of State.
tdog
…yep. Basically the same thing that Biden said this morning. The nominee may be a hack and a fixer and a yes-puppy who’s fundamentally useless to the interests of the country, but his (Biden’s) broad standard was that the President had the right to have the people he wanted in his Cabinet. It’s an easy enough distinction to draw between this and a judgeship that could extend for decades, but still, for those of us who feel that we were just along for the ride on the Kerry nomination, there would be a small ugly twinge of partisan satisfaction at seeing Ms. Rice’s nomination sail through the Senate on a 55 – 45 vote…
How does a person as intelligent as her, get evaulated by other intelligent people, and still walk away from questions critical of her moral fiber and classless character, with a confirmation? I would think someone of her stature would be held to a higher, not a lower standard. I would think that a person of her ability would be more severley damaged by their own lies. Apparently my standards are too high. That must be why I am not a politician?