WaPost defends Rice with charge of racism

| November 23, 2012 | 16 Comments

The Washington Post reaches for new lows today as their editorial staff tries to take up the fight for Susan Rice against the scores of Republican Representatives who signed a letter warning about appointing her as Hillary Clinton’s replacement as the Secretary of State.

After attempting to make the case for her with such pointless blather as she had nothing to do with the administration’s reaction to the terrorist attack on the Benghazi consulate, so why blame her? (Um, because she was on five Sunday morning news shows spreading the party line?) And “she’s nobody’s fool” because she’s a Rhodes Scholar. So was Bill Clinton and he was impeached for lying, so it’s not like studying at Oxford teaches them not to lie.

So, then comes the thinly veiled charge of racism;

Could it be, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus are charging, that the signatories of the letter are targeting Ms. Rice because she is an African American woman? The signatories deny that, and we can’t know their hearts. What we do know is that more than 80 of the signatories are white males, and nearly half are from states of the former Confederacy.

The Confederacy? Really? 147 years after the Democrat-inspired Confederacy expired? 150 years after the Emancipation Proclamation? Nice. That’s all you’ve got? Racial and geographic profiling? How unenlightened and predictable. Weak sauce. Loose shit.

On the other hand, Dana Milbank, a columnist at the Post, who it should also be revealed that he is a white male who comes from a state where anti-draft protests took place during the Civil War, lists several reasons why Rice is so unpopular in Washington, and none of them have to do with her race;

Back when she was an assistant secretary of state during the Clinton administration, she appalled colleagues by flipping her middle finger at Richard Holbrooke during a meeting with senior staff at the State Department, according to witnesses. Colleagues talk of shouting matches and insults.

Among those she has insulted is the woman she would replace at State. Rice was one of the first former Clinton administration officials to defect to Obama’s primary campaign against Hillary Clinton. Rice condemned Clinton’s Iraq and Iran positions, asking for an “explanation of how and why she got those critical judgments wrong.”

[...]

It was Rice’s own shoot-first tendency that caused her to be benched as a spokesman for the Obama campaign for a time in 2008. She unnerved European allies when she denounced as “counterproductive” and “self-defeating” the U.N. policy that Iran suspend its nuclear program before talks can begin. She criticized President George W. Bush and McCain because they “insisted” on it. But, as The Post’s Glenn Kessler pointed out at the time, European diplomats were rattled by such remarks because the precondition was their idea.

Milbanks continues in that vein. It stands in stark contrast to the Editorial Board’s cheap, tawdry and irrelevant charge of racism. Apparently, reasonable people can find plenty of reasons to oppose Rice’s appointment as Secretary of State without spending a moment talking about her race, well, unless you really can’t find any good reasons to appoint her.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Media

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (16)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Devtun says:

    Isn’t the race card supposed to be option of last resort? Y’know like the zombie horde is converging and your cornered bingo ammo.

    AMB Rice may have bigger problems on her hands by throwing the intel community under the crowded Obama bus…Payback is gonna be a 8itch.

    Rice: I Relied “Solely And Squarely” On Information From
    Intel Community
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/11/22/rice_i_relied_solely_and_squarely_on_information_from_intel_community.html

  2. UpNorth says:

    Another race card? Ho-hum, same shit different day.

    And some Rhodes Scholars are nothing to be proud of, Rachel Madcow was a Rhodes Scholar. So was Wesley Weasel Clark and David Kendall, Clinton’s lawyer.

  3. Athena says:

    When will we learn to laugh at charges of racism? This sick game has gone on long enough-we know it’s just projection on the part of Demonrats.

  4. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    Rice is Black? Jeez. All this time I thought Rice she was Italian.

  5. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    Mona Lisa Rice.

  6. Tony says:

    So it has come to this has it? After a nauseating presidential campaign that was chock full of this lowest common denominator type crap, it looks like the Democrats are bound and determined to make yet another go of identity politics. And who can really blame them? Just look how far it’s brought them.

  7. Ex-PH2 says:

    Can any of those whiny, self-serving twits get off the race cards, just once?

    They weren’t even alive when Martin Luther King made his speech at the Lincoln Memorial. They don’t have a clue.

    And they are rapildy becoming boring, whiny and repetitive.

  8. Ex-PH2 Says: They weren’t even alive when Martin Luther King made his speech at the Lincoln Memorial. They don’t have a clue.
    ———-

    This.

    This continues to aggravate me. We have a day dedicated to celebrate Martin Luther King, Jr. We have an entire month dedicated to “Black History”. Yet, it seems tens of millions of people — including 99% of the Black population of this country — don’t have the first clue or understanding of the following words:

    “I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

    I was not alive at this time, but I can understand what this statement means. It’s fairly simple. Judging a man by the content of his character, rather than the color of his skin. I understood this from the time I started paying attention to politics (09/12/2001).

    Something else I have understood fully since that time is that liberals, Democrats and the MF-ing media do NOT understand that statement at all and actually behave completely counter to that “dream”. Despicable.

    The new definition of “racism” is “a conservative/Republican judging a liberal/Democrat man/woman by the content of his/her character.” Again, despicable.

    And nevermind that prominent Blacks like Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele (when he ran for Senate), Colin Powell (when he was SoS for Bush 43) and Condoleeza Rice (when she was SoS for Bush 43) were all smeared with hate and vitriol by the Left/Democrats.

    I’m not sure what angers me more… that these despicable assholes have the utter audacity to smear with vitriol and hate conservative Blacks and then turn around and accuse anyone criticizing liberal Blacks of “racism!!!”… or the fact that the American public is so f—ing stupid to allow them to get away with this BS.

  9. OWB says:

    It IS pretty funny, actually. It was irritating for a bit, but when they pull out the racism card, what they are really doing is admitting that there is no substance to their argument. It is a desperate ploy. Now, if we could just translate that into defeat of them and their counterproductive (for everyone) ideals.

    In a recently made public corollary to the racism charge is calling we who celebrate Thanksgiving white supremicists! You know, because the ideals of America are almost identical to those of Nazis. Really? In the first place, persons of all colors have been celebrating Thanksgiving for quite a few decades. In the second place, how “American sin” in any way relates to the Nazis is repugnant and delusional.

    http://cnsnews.com/blog/dan-gainor/thanksgiving-celebrates-our-original-sin-views-virtually-identical-nazis-journalism

    Silly libs. Unfortunatley, it is taxpayers who are paying idiots to brainwash the young among us in exactly this way.

  10. NHSparky says:

    Okay, let’s see–either she went on all those shows and lied, meaning she doesn’t have the integrity required to be in public service, let alone SecState, or she’s so gullible and mindless repeating what she was told to say she doesn’t have the guile or wits (despite her education) to be in public service, let alone SecState.

    See how that works, lefties? No mention of race needed to demonstrate she’s completely unqualified. Ain’t that something?

  11. Yat Yas 1833 says:

    As a minority I’m disgusted when they start playing the race card and I WAS the victim of racism 50 years ago! I have been allowed to succeed, or fail, because of my abilities not my race. THIS is typical democRATic/libtard BS.

  12. Just an Old Dog says:

    I guess being a white male from 11 certain states automatically makes you unable to make a decision based on judgement instead of race,,, who is stereotyping now?… I guess we shouldnt let anyone from Compton work in a truck stop because they might hit a driver with a brick,,, fargin iceholes.

  13. Frank says:

    When will we start pointing out to these bastards that pulling the race card, as in Rice’s case where only simple incompetency was alleged, is really a de facto admission of basic inferiority?

  14. Casey says:

    Let’s tally up how many of those white, racist males have vehemently supported another Rice; a lovely lady known as “Condi.”

    Hell, I’d guess that 80% or 90% of the Tea Party folks would vote for her in a heartbeat.

    On the other hand, the common wisdom is that the “tea baggers” are a bunch of ignorant, racist rednecks, so what do I know. :-/

  15. DaveO says:

    Most of us here have never read Susan Rice’s academic work. Most of us here have actually interacted with:

    – people of other colors as equals and as superiors
    – people of other cultures from Redneck to Harlem to Gulf Coast to 150+ countries around the world.
    – people of other languages, who wore/wear the US uniform

    Those of us who have done that not only know more about the practicalities of diplomacy and foreign policy, but we are also experts on race relations. The raaaaacist charge only works with college kids and morons.

    Who here cared that Obama is multiracial? Except for our Prog-trolls, no one.

    The WAPO, like the CBC, has all the integrity of a whore in a gangbang complaining about smeared makeup. The WAPO and the CBC eagerly attack ANY American of ANY color, culture, or language who lives MLK’s Dream. Had they defended Condoleeza Rice against the vileness of Progressive/Dem attacks, then yes, they’d have integrity and their words have weight.

    IMO, had James Earl Ray not assassinated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, the members of the CBC would have eagerly done it. It’s never been about racial equality for them, just power.

  16. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    I still say she’s really Italian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *