Rice had her chance to be legitimate, that chance has passed. Webb knew Rice wouldn’t answer the question because he knows, and she is loathe to admit – Rice is in way over her head with Bush. She has no gravity in the Whitehouse. She carries Bush’s dirty water like a housemaid, and has no ability to control his deliberations or actions. When she is finally shouldered to the curb, the Foreign Affairs committee will roll past her to direct their questions at the President’s counsel. The Impeachment Clock is inching toward midnight.

Posted by Bubby on 31 January 2007 @ 8am

“She has no gravity in the Whitehouse.”

You mean she floats around like she’s on the space shuttle?

“She carries Bush’s dirty water like a housemaid…”

That’s coming awfully close to Harry Belafonte’s description of Colin Powell as the “house slave,” and in any interpretation the imagery is terrible. Why is it liberals can get away with saying such reprehensible things?

Posted by Judge Smails on 31 January 2007 @ 9am

Well, Colin Powell as the house slave is a bit more offensive, but I think both are strange claims that rob Powell and Rice of their agency.

Honestly, I don’t see any reason to believe that somehow, Rice is in over her head and that she has no gravity in the White House. My feeling is quite the opposite. Do you have anything to back these claims up, Bubby? Why is it that you see Rice as someone who’s stuck “[carrying] Bush’s dirty water like a housemaid,” as opposed to someone who happily drives our country into the ground like the rest of the administration?

Oh, and JS, the left hardly has a monopoly on saying reprehensible things, and I think it’d behoove rational discourse if everyone agrees to try to keep a level head and denounce this crap when it comes up.

I’m game if you are. :)

Posted by Ben C. on 31 January 2007 @ 11am

Actually, Rice referred to Bush as “my husband” at one point, which would make her something of a Stepford Wife…but close enough to ‘housemaid’. The imagery IS terrible. Doubly so because Rice is THE administration official responsible for good foreign policy and the advocacy of our national interest abroad. She has presided over the most disastrous foreign policy in American history. At least Colin Powell had the integrity to walk away.

Why do conservatives find descriptions of Rice’s performance more reprehensible than the reality of her performance? Is loyalty to Bush more important than loyalty to the Country? Because the longer this goes on, the more you will hear the question.

Posted by Bubby on 31 January 2007 @ 11am

Bubby,

You’ve only served to state that Rice is a bad Secretary of State, not why you see her as both ineffectual in the decision-making process and as having “no ability to control [the administration's] deliberations or actions.”

I think the point Judge Smails was making, or at least the thing that I latched onto about being wrong in your remarks is that you’ve robbed Rice of her agency. You’ve made her into Bush’s maid, and I have no reason to believe that this is true. There is the assumption that she’s in over her head and that she’s just a puppet, and you’ve offered no reasoning that this is the case. One is left to wonder if it has to do with an assumption that it’s the color of her skin or the fact that she’s a woman that leads you to this conclusion.

And I’m not saying that it is. I’m just saying that the argument plays on a subtle stereotype in the same way that Hillary Clinton as a domineering woman (a bitch) plays on bigotry about the role of women. I’m not saying that everyone who thinks Hillary Clinton is overly-domineering is a chauvinist, but rather that the argument uses chauvinism to catch on.

Be that as it may, I don’t know much about Ms. Rice, and I’m not saying that there’s not an argument to be made that she is just a puppet. I just haven’t seen anything that leads me to believe that she’s not a major part of the administration’s decision-making process.

Posted by Ben C. on 31 January 2007 @ 12pm

I think the notion that Secretary Rice isn’t her own woman generally stems from the painful spectacle of Colin Powell’s tenure with the current White House. He was quite clearly representing positions that he did not hold, and it pained him. Those who see the same from Rice are, I suspect, likewise sympathetic to her, rightly or wrongly.

Posted by Waldo Jaquith on 31 January 2007 @ 1pm

Actually, what I found most disconcerting about Bubby’s comment that Sec Rice “carries Bush’s dirty water like a housemaid” was the racial imagery of her acting as a sort of Aunt Jemima or step-and-fetch-it.

Now, as a person of goodwill I’m willing to believe that there wasn’t any animus behind his words, but as a conservative I’m driven up the wall by the knowledge that if the same words had been written by me about an African American in a Democratic White House the pitchforks would be out.

Posted by Judge Smails on 31 January 2007 @ 1pm

JS,

The racial imagery (and why it inspired a racial interpretation) is part of what I was trying to get at. Unfortunately, I’m afraid I haven’t been too clear today. My apologies.

Posted by Ben C. on 31 January 2007 @ 1pm

Powell’s discomfiture was quite clearly from the disconnect between his principles and those of his administration. I don’t see any internal angst from Condi. I see discomfiture, definitely, but to me it seems like discomfiture brought on by having a target painted in glow-in-the-dark orange on her forehead; not discomfiture brought on by internal strife between her loyalty/position and her own sense of right. Unlike Powell, Condi has asserted many times that she is completely supportive of Bush/Cheney policies, and I have been given no reason to doubt her.

Perhaps I missed some subtle clues, though. I don’t tend to be a Condi watcher. I definitely think she’s powerful enough in her own right that we can dump the washmaid analogy right out with the bathwater.

Posted by TLPatten on 1 February 2007 @ 12pm

Smails: You have a condition called “projection” – a defense mechanism in which one attributes (”projects”) to others, one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions. A counselor could help you with this. But the revelation usually brings with it a nervous breakdown as you confront your suppressed true self. So think twice before you procede.

BenC: Condoleeza Rice has an ‘agency’, it is called the Department of State, she is just unable to capably operate it, mostly because the President has no respect for the agency. And I most certainly did not make her Bush’s housemaid, she applied for the job and seems to enjoy the position. Why you wouldn’t think that she is in over her head when every nation in the world is seeking to distance themselves from our blustering confrontational foreign policy …guess it depends on your threshold for failure.

Beyond that, the problem in the Bush Whitehouse has become this; You are either a spoiled rich boy who was born on third and thinks he hit a triple…or you are a child of humble means that can’t believe your great-good-fortune at being in the house, and will not do anything to jeopardize that access. Secretary Rice is the latter. She was just what GW was looking for.

If she had any integrity she would walk out.

Posted by Bubby on 1 February 2007 @ 7pm

Whatever, dude. If you think it’s acceptable to criticize an extremely highly accomplished black woman as a white guy’s maid, no matter what you think of the job she’s doing, then that’s your deal. I have no problem with you criticizing her, I just believe the way you chose to do so was in incredibly poor taste.

Posted by Judge Smails on 2 February 2007 @ 12am

[...] to Waldo Jaquith for bringing this to [...]

Posted by Wags Outside on 3 February 2007 @ 1am