Thread: The Kerry Team will regret that Condi testifies...

What bothers me most about this entire fabrication is the repeated statement that she refuses to testify. SHE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED!!! She just chose to do it privately instead of in front of the T.V. cameras. The recurring accusations that she's trying to hide something from the commission is complete bullshit.

I feel a backlash coming on.

Originally posted by austinite
I feel a backlash coming on.

I just hope and pray it lasts through November................2008.

..i don't agree. i think her initial refusal to testify and then bascially testifying on 60 Minutes makes her look like a pawn of the current administration.

i know "taking one for the team" happens a lot in politics and life but i don't think she will come off well at this point. many will perceive her as a puppet plus now there is the perception that they she was trying to be evasive initially.

Originally posted by nikegurl
..i don't agree. i think her initial refusal to testify and then bascially testifying on 60 Minutes makes her look like a pawn of the current administration.

GAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Didn't you read what I already posted? She DID testify! She NEVER refused! The only difference between she and the rest of the "witnesses" is that she didn't testify on T.V. This is a very common practice among ANY president's advisors. It's the exact same thing as doctor/patient or lawyer/client confidentiality. The only people on the planet that keep pounding the drumb about her not testifying are the liberal media who are telling LIES!!!

Originally posted by ALBOB
GAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Didn't you read what I already posted? She DID testify! She NEVER refused! The only difference between she and the rest of the "witnesses" is that she didn't testify on T.V. This is a very common practice among ANY president's advisors. It's the exact same thing as doctor/patient or lawyer/client confidentiality. The only people on the planet that keep pounding the drumb about her not testifying are the liberal media who are telling LIES!!!

Hey Albob, now why did she refuse to testify

Originally posted by austinite
...because the world will see that she is intelligent, articulate, loyal, extremely knowledgeable and very likable. Bush was smart to make her his Security Advisor.

Many black americans and women will no-doubt feel a sense of pride in her performance and position. This could result in some additional votes for the GOP.

The democrats have miscalculated again.

This is what is wrong with us Americans. Just because you are African-American or a woman doesn't mean you should take pride in Condelezza Rice's performance. She is an individual with individual accomplishments, do something on your own to make yourself proud. You don't see me rejoicing whenever someone with a small wiener does something great, although Albob rarely does.

..so if it's standard practice not to testify on TV - why did she then go on 60 Minutes?

Originally posted by ALBOB
What bothers me most about this entire fabrication is the repeated statement that she refuses to testify. SHE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED!!! She just chose to do it privately instead of in front of the T.V. cameras. The recurring accusations that she's trying to hide something from the commission is complete bullshit.

When the White House declassified and released that supposedly "confidential" audio tape with Clarke spinning niceties about the Administration's policies (er..or, doing his Washington job) at the request of the Republican News Net...er...I mean Fox News, they set a preedent that confidentiality among Administration employees isn't important if the information can be used against someone publicly.

Since Rice has already testified privately and there appear to be some new questions, there isn't any principle involved now - or any reason for her to not appear publicly before the commission. After all, she IS a public servant, has made numerous public statements refuting Clarke's accusations and has indicated that there isn't anything special to hide now. The President supported these Commission hearings for a reason, and I'm assuming that reason wasn't to grandstand another wave of support for his "divinely-assisted" governing abilities.

This isn't even about who made mistakes or might have fumbled the ball to many people - that's why Clarke's public apology meant so much to the families of those victims.

I would think that privacy in meetings shouldn't be essential when the Commission is supposed to make a report anyway that apparently will be accessed by the public...or at least Fox News. I'd rather like to see an unedited version.