Rice Confirmed - 85-13

[conjur]

Those brave Senators opposed:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Durbin
Byrd
Kerry
Jeffords
Reed
Dayton
Akaka
Lautenberg
Harkin
Bayh

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: conjur
Those brave Senators opposed:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Durbin
Byrd
Kerry
Jeffords
Reed
Dayton
Akaka
Lautenberg
Harkin
Bayh

Good for them. Lying to get into an illegal war seems to be ok to most Senators.

Over 1400 dead soldiers is just no big deal to them.

 

[maddogchen]

13? thats it? 30 democrats voted for her? BAH!

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
13? thats it? 30 democrats voted for her? BAH!

D.I.N.O.'s they are.

 

[piasabird]

Most senators voted for the war to begin with, lest you forget.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: maddogchen
13? thats it? 30 democrats voted for her? BAH!

D.I.N.O.'s they are.

I was surprised at Obama's Aye vote. Chalk it up to freshman jitters. And Lieberman might as well be a chairman of a defense contractor. Damn he sure was kissing up to Condi.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Most senators voted for the war to begin with, lest you forget.

BASED ON GOD DAMN LIES!

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Most senators voted for the war to begin with, lest you forget.

No one voted FOR a war.

Remember?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: piasabird
Most senators voted for the war to begin with, lest you forget.

No one voted FOR a war.

Remember?

Very true.

 

[DealMonkey]

I wonder why Zell Miller (AKA TastesLikeChicken) didn't challenge these 13 to a duel?

"Spitballs Chris!"

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: conjur
Those brave Senators opposed:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Durbin
Byrd
Kerry
Jeffords
Reed
Dayton
Akaka
Lautenberg
Harkin
Bayh

The MAJORITY of democrats approve of her... how does that make you feel? 85-13 seems like a mandate to me.. I don't see how you can question her qualifications. Surely if she were as bad as you libs make her out to be you should have gotten more than 13 people to oppose her?

But, of course, of those 'Brave' senators you talk about.. one of them is basically an alcoholic murderer.. another is a former member of the Klan.. I guess when you talk about qualifications, thats the type of thing you are looking for.. Maybe Condi should have drove someone into a river, or joined a racist group.. THEN maybe she would be qualified in YOUR mind.

 

[conjur]

No one was questioning her qualifications. Those opposed were more concerned with the fact that Rice lied multiple times to the 9/11 Commission and to the American people.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: conjur
Those brave Senators opposed:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Durbin
Byrd
Kerry
Jeffords
Reed
Dayton
Akaka
Lautenberg
Harkin
Bayh

The MAJORITY of democrats approve of her... how does that make you feel? 85-13 seems like a mandate to me.. I don't see how you can question her qualifications. Surely if she were as bad as you libs make her out to be you should have gotten more than 13 people to oppose her?

But, of course, of those 'Brave' senators you talk about.. one of them is basically an alcoholic murderer.. another is a former member of the Klan.. I guess when you talk about qualifications, thats the type of thing you are looking for.. Maybe Condi should have drove someone into a river, or joined a racist group.. THEN maybe she would be qualified in YOUR mind.

basically an alcoholic murderer?
commit already!


but honestly im tired of this being a tactic in avoiding the issue. we all agree: murder, alcoholism and the klan are not good. BUT i'm not a member of the klan, ive never murdered anyone and even if i am an addict that dont make me a bad person (im not, but dont judge people based on that. its ignorant) and those dissenting voices represented people like myself who dont believe she should be there. the point is not to necessarily block her from being confirmed but its an act of communication between the american people and those in power.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: conjur
No one was questioning her qualifications. Those opposed were more concerned with the fact that Rice lied multiple times to the 9/11 Commission and to the American people.

And those not opposed were not concerned with the "fact" that she lied?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: conjur
No one was questioning her qualifications. Those opposed were more concerned with the fact that Rice lied multiple times to the 9/11 Commission and to the American people.

And those not opposed were not concerned with the "fact" that she lied?

Apparently, they were willing to forgive her for that or just don't agree that she lied (for some unknown reason) and let her be SoS.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur
No one was questioning her qualifications. Those opposed were more concerned with the fact that Rice lied multiple times to the 9/11 Commission and to the American people.

Where could one get a copy of the Kennedy remarks that did not question her qualifications?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur
No one was questioning her qualifications. Those opposed were more concerned with the fact that Rice lied multiple times to the 9/11 Commission and to the American people.

Where could one get a copy of the Kennedy remarks that did not question her qualifications?

http://www.google.com

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur
No one was questioning her qualifications. Those opposed were more concerned with the fact that Rice lied multiple times to the 9/11 Commission and to the American people.

Where could one get a copy of the Kennedy remarks that did not question her qualifications?

http://www.google.com

"No one was questioning her qualifications."



I thought you had a problem with these kind of statements??

 

[conjur]

WTF are you talking about? Show me where a Senator was questioning Rice's education and/or experience.

 

[BeauJangles]

I think part of the reason only 15 stood in opposition was because democrats are afraid to come out and challenge much of what Bush does, for fear that it will increase their unpopularity. People might see them as spoilsports.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: conjur
WTF are you talking about? Show me where a Senator was questioning Rice's education and/or experience.

To paraphrase The Princess Bride, I don't think that word [qualifications] means what they think it means.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur
WTF are you talking about? Show me where a Senator was questioning Rice's education and/or experience.

Well you can google that, but I did see Kennedy on the television yesterday say that condi was not qualified for the position, due to her experience in the iraq fiasco. It certainly is not in line with what you said up there...

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: conjur
Those brave Senators opposed:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Durbin
Byrd
Kerry
Jeffords
Reed
Dayton
Akaka
Lautenberg
Harkin
Bayh

The MAJORITY of democrats approve of her... how does that make you feel? 85-13 seems like a mandate to me.. I don't see how you can question her qualifications. Surely if she were as bad as you libs make her out to be you should have gotten more than 13 people to oppose her?

But, of course, of those 'Brave' senators you talk about.. one of them is basically an alcoholic murderer.. another is a former member of the Klan.. I guess when you talk about qualifications, thats the type of thing you are looking for.. Maybe Condi should have drove someone into a river, or joined a racist group.. THEN maybe she would be qualified in YOUR mind.

Every time I hear the word mandate, I'm reminded of a quote that says that even if a ton of people believe in a stupid idea, it's still a stupid idea. I don't really understand the idea that if I think Rice will be a bad SecState, and then I see a bunch of people supporting her, it should make me change my mind. Maybe that stuff works on you Bush supporters, but I like to think for myself.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur
WTF are you talking about? Show me where a Senator was questioning Rice's education and/or experience.

Well you can google that, but I did see Kennedy on the television yesterday say that condi was not qualified for the position, due to her experience in the iraq fiasco. It certainly is not in line with what you said up there...

That's not questioning her qualifications (which refer to education/experience). Kennedy was concerned with her misleading and false statements.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur
WTF are you talking about? Show me where a Senator was questioning Rice's education and/or experience.

Well you can google that, but I did see Kennedy on the television yesterday say that condi was not qualified for the position, due to her experience in the iraq fiasco. It certainly is not in line with what you said up there...

That's not questioning her qualifications (which refer to education/experience). Kennedy was concerned with her misleading and false statements.

Correct, part of the job description is to be HONEST. She does not qualify in that regard.