Is Condi Rice The Worst Or What?
Has there been a worse secretary of state in the last five decades than Condoleezza Rice?
Using William Rogers’ appointment as secretary of state by Richard Nixon in 1969 as a baseline, there have been a total of 12 secretaries of state. They include Henry Kissinger (1973-77), Cyrus Vance (1977-80), Edmund Muskie (1980-81), Alexander Haig (1981-82), George Schultz (1982-89), James Baker (1989-92), Lawrence Eagleburger (1992-93), Warren Christopher (1993-97), Madeleine Albright (1997-2001) and Colin Powell (2001-2005).
Before we can consider whether Condi may be the worst, another question first needs to be asked: To what extent can the conduct of a secretary of state be separated from his or her president? Is a secretary’s success or failure substantially contingent on the success of the president?
That’s an easy one: As the White House goes so goes the State Department, and Rice’s tenure has been enormously afflicted . . . er, affected by what has passed for a Bush administration foreign policy.
That disastrous policy has been a mixture of bellicosity, arrogance, willful naïveté and, on the rarest of occasions, actual diplomacy. The result is that, thanks to the Iraq War but not entirely because of it, America’s world standing is at a low ebb and its once considerable moral gravitas has been squandered. It is, to an embarrassing extent, literally a global laughingstock.
Then there is Rice herself, a brainy but wisdom-less sycophant who even in these porous times of leaks about just about everything seems to have seldom spoken up about anything, and with 15 months left has a legacy of having no legacy.
Unless you consider her legacy to be tacit approval of torture while national security adviser, ignoring international treaties, allowing Blackwater USA thugs to run wild in Iraq, feckless ineffectuality regarding the war in Lebanon and genocide in Sudan . . .
When a Kissinger, Albright or Powell spoke, people listened. When Condi speaks does anyone listen, let alone even care?
What do you think? Does she take the cake or what?
opinions powered by SendLove.to
12 Responses to “Is Condi Rice The Worst Or What?”
‘bellicosity, arrogance“ “ willful naivete†“wisdomless sycophantâ€
Gee, why not just call her a Nazi and be done with it, oh wait I think you already did, never mind.
Condi has been hamstrung by Cheney, Addington and Bolton- -who also contributed to the ineffectiveness of Colin Powell in Bush’s first term.There is no clarity to our foreign policy-just competing interests btwn those who favor force and consider diplomacy appeasement, and those who only want force as a last resort. I think Condi and Powell are in the latter group, but Cheney has been more influential with Bush.
Well, from what it looks like, Condi doesn’t seem very popular or at least very well-liked. I guess any figure tied to the administration suffers from the ‘halo effect’ of Bush’s personal approval ratings.
Maybe Condo doesn’t have the personality and leadership to be an effective SoS. She maybe like Carter, an intellectual in over her head without the forcefullness(sp) to push through her/his agenda. Both are more suited for a university than foreign affairs.
Is Condo’s job performance nearly as bad as Karen Hughes? Now KH is a national/international disgrace compared to Condo’s ineffectiveness.
*squawk* Bush people bad, Bush people bad! *squawk* Bad, bad! *squawk*
DLS – Please explain why Condo isn’t a bad SoS and WTF Karen Hughes is doing. I give Condo kudos for her intellect, but KH is a joke. She is neither an intellect nor competent. I compare Condo to Carter, both are bad executives at a government level.
Look, Condi will be a key asset to us when we begin our negotiations with the USSR.
Just wait…
The comparison demeans Carter.
I think Condi has adjusted her position, but it comes too late. Plus, she is still prone to speak in the tone deaf manner that Bush uses.
Her words during the first stage of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict in Lebanon (the dawn of a new world) did more to stiffen Hezbollah’s resolve and standing among Muslims than any encouragement from Muslim leaders.
She still speaks in the same preachy and talking-down-to way: they must do this, they need to do that. Sounding superior and tough does not make you superior and tough. It just makes the other guy want to go one better in both superiority and toughness.
We desperately need to reintroduce both diplomacy and statesmanship in the language of Washington.
Condi does not seem to be fully up to it.
Well, her intellect is fine, as you already note, and she handles her job fine. She’s even willing to pursue (and cram down Israel’s throat) the Road Map of the Quartet (*gag* what an “affected” as well as elitist name for the four parties), so lefties really can’t complain (honestly) all that much, though they probably are upset that she is critical of the terrorist government of Iran. Shaun was simply parroting his Bush-bashing lines once again. (I join the others who are concerned what he will be able to do once Bush is replaced in 2009.
I’m not certain how great a role Hughes plays in this administration, but certainly she’s a long-term insider who may be engaged in frequent damage control (rather than PR struggles, which are left to Perino, and for that matter to Rice as well when it comes to foreign policy).
[...] The Moderate Voice – Great at Debussy, but how about diplomacy? Has there been a worse secretary of state in the last five decades than Condoleezza Rice? … 10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with … Read more [...]