No. She has no integrity, as shes part of the reason why we have 3100 dead. See her at the hearing choking on her words when it got heated.
Shes not presidential material. And the people have seen her attachment to Bush, for anyone who had any integrity would not cover up Bushes tracks.
And the people know this
2007-02-14 09:38:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by writersbIock2006 5
·
6⤊
2⤋
Forget Obama, he's dead in the water.
Now, let's talk about Condi vs. Hillary.
How can you dispute that this country should vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton? What this country needs right now is a lying, scheming, duplicitous, bitter old shrew whose every action since her husband got beaten by G.W. Bush is to get into the Oval Office. Forget the fact that she doesn't have much of a track record of accomplishment during her Senate snint. The fact that she was clever enough to dupe the normally savvy voters into believing she wasn't just using her Senate seat as a springboard to the White House shows how marvellously conniving she can be. Let's put that two-faced ability of hers to work against our enemies.
Forget the fact that Condi is much more intelligent. Condi may be academically and professionally at the top of the heap, she may have amazing talent for international diplomacy and fixing deficit budgets, but can she lie, cheat and steal like Hillary? No way. Aren't these normally undesirable traits of Hillary's what we need in the White House?
Sure, you could argue that Condi would be a gift sent from heaven in terms of our international image: how can politically correct people heap absuse upon a strong, black woman like they do on Bush? Sure, our international reputation would rise considerably, and foreign nations would be more willing to work with us again.
But what about the stubborn countries? Condi would have to use old fashioned diplomacy. Hillary could send out flocks of winged monkeys to do her bidding.
2007-02-14 09:51:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I choose not to even think of voting for any of the three.Obama while a charismatic intelligent man,he is far too inexperienced to be president.
Hillary scares me,she seems to be her own worst enemy and I simple don't trust her on the illegal alien issue.
Ms. Rice is just not presidential material,she is simply a puppet for GWB.Id like to hear her own views on a few things.I have no idea where she stands on any thing.
I don't see anyone that at this time I could put my support and money behind.But I am watching and reading and researching several
prospects.Only time will tell who will get my vote in 2008.
2007-02-14 09:47:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by Yakuza 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Ms. Rice is merely a puppet of the Bush administration. She may be smart and savvy but she sold herself to the devil when she started parroting the party line, lying to everyone and generally being Bushes "good little soldier" by perpetuating the WMD thingie and supporting sending our troops to war.
She would never be electible...Thinking people can see right through her.
2007-02-14 12:08:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
She told the 9/11 Commission that she did not remember meeting with Clinton's outgoing antiterrorism team, where she received warnings that bin Laden should be caught before his terrorist plot could be realized. This is a lie, and she should be impeached. If she really doesn't remember, she has no business in politics, that would be extreme ineptitude.
2007-02-14 09:42:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Aleksandr 4
·
4⤊
0⤋
The US has been managed like a corrupt corporation for the last 6 years because we put corporate CEO types in office. Rice is part of the problem, not the solution.
2007-02-14 09:42:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Ms. Rice has never held an elected office whereas both Hillary and Barak have been elected to the US Senate.
Moreover, Both Hillary and Barak have spouses and children, much like the vast majority of Americans. A childless, never-married man or woman will have not the slightest clue as to what is important to the average America.
2007-02-14 09:38:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by vt500ascott 3
·
5⤊
2⤋
"Adept at being at the helm" doesn't apply to Rice, who as head National Security Adviser completely ignored the security briefing meeting memo titled "Al Qaeda Determined to Strike Within US Boundaries" prior to 9-11, lied about having received that warning, then claimed she was helpless to act on it because the terrorists didn't send her a blueprint of their plans by certified mail describing the identity of the hijackers, their flight numbers, and the time, date and target of the attacks.
No, she isn't qualified to be president.
2007-02-14 09:39:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by chimpus_incompetus 4
·
5⤊
0⤋
You're absolutely right. Check out Dick Morris' book, "Condi vs. Hillary", and you'll find you are in good company. However, I really don't think she wants the job. She knows that she'll be "damned if she does, and damned if she doesn't". I also think she realizes that it will take a miracle to turn this country around, given what the libs have done to it, and she doesn't believe in miracles. By the way, you left out that she is a concert pianist. Have a good day!!
2007-02-14 09:54:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by Pete 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Rice has turned into a bush apologist, toeing the party line and defending every one of his missteps. She has lost credibility. I'm sorry to say, so has McCain, after his performance in the 2004 election. I used to think McC had principles.
2007-02-14 09:40:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by Meg W 5
·
4⤊
0⤋