Looks like Condoleezza Rice will be named as Bush's new secretary of state. And I am so torn. This would be a first for an African-American woman, and that's a HUGE deal to me.
And no one's doubting that she's qualified. As the Washington Post reports, "Rice is a poor Alabama cotton farmer's granddaughter who became an accomplished classical pianist and ice skater and graduated from college at 19. She speaks Russian and served a two-year stint as the National Security Council's Soviet expert in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. She also was named, at age 38, provost of Stanford University, essentially the chief operating officer of a huge institution."
But I don't understand how a woman, let alone a woman of color, could support an administration so backwards.
Tell us what you're thinking...
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
Actually, I'm ot doubting that she is qualified, but rather whether or not she has the ability to do the job. After all, despite her qualifications, Ms. Rice did not recognize the fall of the Soviet Union when it was her job to do so under Bush, Sr. She also did not recognize the threat of terrorism before 9/11.
I agree, it's great that an African-American woman has such an important government position. However, I cannot support the policies she espouses nor her abilities.
My suspicion is that she is going to the State department to do the same sort of house cleaning there that Rumsfeld is doing at Defense and Goss is doing at the CIA. If so, then we'll see some resignations shortly after her arrival and those people will be replaced by people who are more supportive of the administration.
BD's exactly right. I suppose it depends on the meaning of "qualified". If "qualified" means having held positions that are appropriate experience for the appointment, then sure. However, she has not had much of a record of showing wisdom or integrity (failure to spot the false Niger uranium charges and/or lying about it afterwards, failure to take action in response to the 8/6/01 presidential daily briefing re: terrorism, disingenuous testimony to the 9-11 commission re: same, uncritical support of Iraq war, etc.), so I see little to cheer about.
Freds got it right. Ms. Rice has lied to the American public and the world. Her unswavering support of all the Bush policies show her to be just another political appointee.
Condi Rice is highly over-rated. Also, she neither has the portfolio experience nor the track record as NSA to indicate that she is skilled at either terrorism or Mideast politics. Of course, one can't rule out that she knew and advised appropriate anti-terror actions and was over-ruled - but in that case, why not step down? Colin Powell lost credibility by hanging in so long, and the same can apply to Condi Rice.
She what folks in the business world call, "managerially incompetent." She couldn't manage her way out of a paper bag. She could, however, tell you how the paper bag is made.
If there was ever a time for a female-friendly equivalent to the "Peter Principle," this is it.
In Canadian politics, we went through something parallel recently... but the candidate in question (for leadership of our Conservative party) was even more woefully unqualified. Belinda Stronach came off as a little girl who was given daddy's corporation to run, and some political people said she should run for leadership, so like, she did!
Ms. Rice might have some education and experience behind her, but she strikes me very much as someone elses puppet, and not one with much integrity to boot.
Of course, only the lefties feel that the Bush administration lacks integrity, so it would be interesting to see what a solid right-winger feels about Ms. Rice's qualifications for the job.