NO RICE WITH THAT ROMNEY
WHERE'S THE BEEF?
By: Selwyn Duke
With the rumor that
Condoleezza Rice is a frontrunner to be Mitt Romneys vice-presidential pick,
shes the talk of the town. Shes so
intelligent, so sophisticated, so statesmanlike and so scholarly that she could make you
wonder if Hillary Clinton really ever was the most intelligent woman in
America. Thats the pitch, anyway. But when you check this Rices ingredients,
you have to ask, wheres the beef?
assessing this, Im reminded of how the late Christopher Hitchens put Bill
Clintons so-called intellectual prowess in perspective. The 42nd president has a long history
of making statements, Hitchens pointed out, yet what has he ever said that was profound or
memorable? Of course, like Clinton and I
feel your pain or lawyering the word is, Rice has made memorable
statements. But theyre all hamburger
helperway past the sell-by date.
instance, when defending the fools errand of trying to put a square democratic peg
in a round Islamic hole, Rice once said,
We should note that unlike in our Constitutional Convention, the Iraqis have not
made a compromise as bad as the one that made my ancestors three-fifths of a man. Now, lets put aside the fact that the Iraqis
have incorporated Sharia into their constitution. Informed
people understand the origin of the three-fifths language.
To wit: it was slave states that
wanted blacks counted as whole people because this would increase their representation in
Congress and hence their power. Northern
states, however, wanted to minimize slave-state power and thus didnt want the slaves
counted at all. The result, as is usually the
case in democratic republics, was a compromise: the three-fifths compromise.
only question now is whether Rice didnt fully understand thisand she probably
knows something about the origin of the constitutional language since she called it a
compromiseor if she was just aiming for a cheap applause line (and a
cheap shot at America). Regardless, was hers
an intelligent comment?
should also be noted that European peoples might not have been the first to practice
slavery, but they were the first to eliminate it. Yet,
to this day, Muslims still practice slavery in places such as Africa. Thus, what is to be concluded when Rice utters, as
is her wont, divisive comments such as when the Founding Fathers said We the
people, they didnt mean me? Is
it an intelligent thing to do?
Then try this Rice comment on
for size. She also
said when defending Iraq policy that it is the kind of people who once believed
that blacks were unfit for democracy who say that the people of the Middle
East, perhaps because of their color or their creed or their culture or even perhaps
because of their religion, are somehow incapable of democracy.
we know it was Rices job under George W. Bush to defend his administrations
policies, but the above simply was not an intelligent defense. How can you conflate an inborn physical
characteristic such as skin color with creed, culture and religion, which involve belief? Does Rice not understand why John Adams stated,
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any
other? If a peoples beliefs
dont influence its compatibility with democracy, what does?
Rices logic out, wed have to say that a people imbued with Nazi or communist
doctrine couldnt be unfit for democracy, either, as such things are simply
creeds. Translated, her comment
means that beliefs simply dont matter. Of
course, I dont think this actually is her belief; she surely just didnt think
things through. But is it intelligent to make
public pronouncements on matters of import without thinking things through?
to this the fact that Rice described herself as mildly pro-choice, wishes the
U.S. would have signed on to the global-warming scam treaty the Kyoto Protocol, and was so
enthusiastic about Barack Obamas 2008 win that it indicated she might have voted for
him, and what kind of profile emerges? She
simply is not a conservativeexcept maybe in the European sense of the term. And, we have to ask, is this an intelligent
you think me harsh, note that I spoke only of Condoleezza Rices remarks and
positions; I didnt say she was
unintelligent. Im sure she is so in the
sense that my family doctor, a couple of relatives and some other people Ive known
are intelligent. Im sure she plays the
piano beautifully and I know she excelled at academics, but this doesnt qualify one
for high office. In fact, she reminds me of
someone. You know the type: he has his head in
books all day, gets straight As, spends many hours a week cloistered practicing an
instrument, but has no common sense. To
paraphrase Mark Twain, she seems like the kind of person who has let her schooling
interfere with her education.
Rices positions, one may wonder why shes as popular as she is (63 percent of
respondents in a Drudge poll want her as Romneys pick). Well, the answer reminds me of something. Rice once said that what attracted her to George W.
Bush was that he spoke of the soft bigotry of low expectations, something she
understands well. Ironically, though, this is
precisely the phenomenon attracting many conservatives to Rice. After all, would a white man with her history and
political positions draw so much conservative support?
Would we even be talking about him?
we wouldnt even know about him.
Why? Because President Bush never would have chosen Rice
to be secretary of state were it not for her race and sex.
The reality is that, just like Obama, she was an affirmative-action
course, this is where some may opine that, with beating Obama being the priority, this is
precisely what we need. Ill see your
epidermal melanin content and raise you an X chromosome.
But dont bank on this carrying the day, as its hardly a given
that Rice will sweeten the dish for voters. After
all, staunch traditionalists wont like her for the reasons Ive outlined here,
devoutly Democrat blacks will dismiss her as an Aunt Thomasina, and the
swinging-to-and-fro middle may not like her ties to still unpopular Bush. So not only is Rice disastrous ideologically,
shes at best risky politically.
keep searching the menu. The Romney has
already been ordered, paid for and cooked up, but hold the Rice. We need something that will stick to our ribs.
Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online
and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush
Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show. His
work has appeared in Pat Buchanan's magazine The American Conservative and he writes
regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective. He is a regular
contributor to Ether Zone.
"Published originally at EtherZone.com :
republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
Selwyn Duke can be reached at: SelwynDuke@optonline.net
the July 16, 2012 issue of
Copyright © 1997 - 2012 Ether Zone.
We invite your
comments on this article in our forum!