Skip to comments.Cheney: Idea Of Female President Not So Abstract As 2008 Nears
Posted on 08/17/2006 8:30:54 PM PDT by Solitar
ASPEN, Colo. -- The idea of a woman president is not so abstract now that the 2008 election nears, Lynne Cheney, wife of vice president Dick Cheney said Wednesday. "If you're thinking of Condi Rice, I think she has good credentials," Cheney said. During an appearance sponsored by the Aspen Institute, Cheney talked mostly about education and history but did venture into current politics, including the possibility of women running for president. She did not mention New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, widely thought to be considering a presidential run in 2008. "(National security) is the driving issue," Cheney said. "The stereotype exists that women are softer. Maybe it's not true. I don't think it's true. But it's a little bit of a challenge to overcome for a woman president."
(Excerpt) Read more at thedenverchannel.com ...
Condi has not shown any interest in running. To win, she'd have to really want the presidency.
Condi does not have enough balls to stand firmly against the terrorists, ...oh..wait a minute..well, you know what I mean.
as long as she has the right position on social issues, fine. If not, no thanks.
If Condi is not aggressively and emphatically pro-life, forget it. I do not know her stance, and she does not have to take one, unless she is running.
Condi is softening in her denials. Unlike in past years, lately she has been avoiding saying outright no (or so that has been posted elsewhere here). She is quite busy this year with Secretary of State duties. Next year may be a new ball game.
I've never been entirely comfortable with people saying it's time for this or that, when it comes to women in public office. When a woman who is qualified wants to run, she'll run on her record just like any man would. If she's the best candidate, she'll likely win.
Golda Miehr (sp?), Margaret Thatcher, Indura (sp?) Ghandi were each voted in by the majority of their electorate. Had a qualified woman come along sooner, I'll bet they would have won sooner.
Frankly, the last thing I'm going to think about is sex, if the opposing candidate hawks policies like the dems will this year. If a female candidate has a good grasp of the issues and make the right assurances, they'll get my vote. I'd wager that's the way it's been a lot longer than most people think it has.
I think Condi would make an excellent Commander in Chief. National Security is my #1 issue in '08.
Well, now that the NFL Commissioners job has been filled, Condi's free to become POTUS.
Diplomacy includes being able to want things but not show it until the right time.
Kinda' like chess and poker.
Why become a major target for liberals/MSM any sooner than necessary?
President Gore wanted it more than candidate Bush. :)
I still think Cheney may choose not to continue as VP in 2007 and the logical choice to replace him is .......
I would vote for Condi over any democrat. I am not saying she is the best candidate, I am saying she would get my vote, I would never vote for a dem.
Then based on what I have heard, you are likely to have to forget it. I don't think she is.
I want her to run.
Timing is everything. You're right about that.
LOL. I am glad we can laugh about it.
The question has never been about a woman as President.
The question is about a qualified woman to run as President.
I'm a fan of the President Rice idea.
This is the most serious mention of it I've seen.
Condi, of course, to replace Cheney as VP in 2007. Then she would be free to campaign for President. Condi could tear holes in the Democrat party by taking away major portions of the female and black vote.
Besides, she knows more about foreign policy than any of the governors or senators who may run for President. THAT is the major qualification, in my opinion, for a President.
Domestic stuff should be left to the States. I believe that Condi's position on abortion is just that -- leave such decisions to the States rather than the Federal Government. She is personally against abortion except in the most extreme cases.
I used to think that too but recently she is going the way of the "politician". That is, peace at any cost, kissing the UN's ass etc. etc. She lost me as a voter unless she is the only thing the Repubs put up. I would vote for her over a Dem but that is all. Not even V.P. after this last several months. Just another of the same old , same old. (politician)
Which of the Republican candidates are not the same old, same old politicians? Given the most electable alternatives, Condi seems to be the best of the lot.
Amen. The President's main duty is in my opinion (and where I whole heartedly agree with you) is in the foreign policy and defense arena. The Presidents get way too much credit and blame for domestic economic policy outcomes. In a free market as ours, the administration doesn't *really* have that much impact on the economy. Therefore, the primary impact is on the defense, national security and foreign policy. In that respect, Condi is eminently qualified. The fact that she'd eviscerate Dem base is just a bonus over which I can giggle incessantly.
Wellll... there are bigger things at play. It's not like she makes those decisions an a vacuum, without direction of the President and rest of the administration. There are greater geopolitical considerations at play, that we cannot see because we don't have all the information the administratio has. I believe that there has been very rational thinking and risk/benefit & pro/con analysis behind every move the whole administration has made, and, there must be a reason for the recent decisions. What gets her my vote, hovever, is that decisions, good or bad, *are* made. Democrats would just keep polling and 'thinking' (as if they ever do that other than for their political gain) until the polls agreed with their own world view.
I like Dr. Rice. I could vote for her.
Has anyone ever been elected President
who hasn't run for elected office before?
Ike comes to mind...any others?
Just hide and watch. She'll run. Right now, if she even hinted that she was interested she could not function effectively as Secretary of State. Everything she did would be deemed as "political" by the media.
"W" wants her to run (he refers to her as "43") as does Laura and many other top Administration officials. It would be awfully hard to resist the public pressure that is about to come about to try and encourage her to run.
As a child, on a visit to Washington, D.C., she made this statement to her dad standing outside the White House: "I can't go in there now, but someday, I'll live there."
I don't believe that will happen. Most Dems will "Uncle Tom" her and vote as usual. They already do that.
I'd love to see her win because I think she is qualified, she has the guts I look for in that job and she would blow a few Democrat myths right out of the water once and for all. Don't think for a minute it wouldn't chap off liberals if the first black and first woman President came from the Republican Party. It would kill them and even they admit that. OF course right now they simply say it won't ever happen because institutional racism and sexism among Repubs would never allow it. That is mostly wishful thinking.
I'd also be less than honest if I didn't mention sharing the same hometown plays into it too.
Hey, I'm human.
I don't dig too much some of the stuff that has gone on with Israel, spending and illegal immigration under her current boss, but I'd love to hear what she would do.
You are right.
I would like to see Condi run. Of course I'd like to hear her on the issues before deciding whether to vote for her. As Secretary of State and National Security Adviser I think she's been fantastic.
First, she'd have to make it through the primaries. If she did and it came down to her vs Hillary, Condi could be to the left of Hillary and I'd still vote for her because I believe she is a straight shooter and honest. That counts a lot in my book.
Of course I don't expect her to be to the left of Hillary. It could be fun. I'd like to see her and Alan Keyes both run in the primary.
If you want the brass ovaries it's going to take to finish the war on terror, we're going to have to go with Ann Coulter.
Should I reply....? Shouldn't I....? Well here goes...
"She has a pair of steel ones that clang when she walks."
It's a saying from back in my military days ;-)
But neither will happen, absent death or debilitation Cheney will serve out his term.
I think a woman can be President, we do have organization skills; we can be patient; we can teach while learning ourselves; we can communicate on various subjects; we are good at talking, both on the phone and to other people; we can run a budget; we can type, take out the trash, and do alot of things all at once....
There is only ONE person that CANNOT for ANY reason be POTUS and that is the Slimy Hag....we have had a gut full of clintons to last us for YEARS to come, and there aren't any Bush women that are ready yet, so that takes care of that situation, not that Bush is a bad name to have...at least they are honest, decent people, unlike the slimy hag and the other thing that was in the WH for 8 years....and then there is the carter/peanut situation....what a joke that was for so long....talk about stupid is as stupid does, now there is a guy that couldn't do ANYTHING but whine...
And yes, I think if Condi wanted the nomination she would get it and unlike the slimy hag from NY, she would be a decent upstanding intelligent person to represent the United States.
If you're thinking of Condi Rice
Right now she's the only woman in politics that I would trust to run our country.
One thing I alwys find amazing about these discussions....
Two women run for POTUS:
Candidate one is:....A older, crass woman who's spent her life trying to conquer the "Old Boys" network so vehemently she became a female characature of one. The epitome of the old stoggy c.e.o. Who tauts her affirmative action and civil rights stands by the amount of money "spent" on them ( minority of the moment) not by who she surrounds herself with.
Candidate two........ A self made Lady , well versed in foreign affairs, advised presidents on international crisis and negotiated for the U.S. who's served as a university provost, a concert pianist and a expert on americas ( current) favorite past time the NFL.
If you listen to the stereotyping of the MSM, who would you think would be the liberal? Who would you think the supposed "conservative angry young white men" would support and vote for, Who would you think would be the candidate of the so called diversity party.
Amazing how skewed the MSM is versus reality here.
She has excellent credentials.
GO CONDI, GO!
Well apologies in advance if I'm p*ssing on the parade but Condi Rice's performance in the Middle East recently wasn't exactly a blazing success and she suffers from a similar affliction that Senator Mrs. Bill Clinton suffered from prior to her election to the junior Senator's seat from New York in 2000, which is:
Condi Rice has never been elected to ANY office, none whatsoever, and has absolutely NO experience in running as a candidate in a national campaign.
Now don't misunderstand, I like Condi Rice, but this is one of the very rare occasions where I disagree with our esteemed Vice President - I honestly don't think she's ready for prime time as a presidential candidate, in fact I'm not sure if she ever will be - her persona when speaking in public (at least for me) tends to project uncertainty, nervousness, and does not inspire confidence.
In my view, the only difference between Condi Rice as President and Colin Powell as President is the obvious gender difference and the fact that Powell has the military credentials that Rice does not and will never have.
OK you Condifanatics, flame away.
Ahhh, I see it was Lynne Cheney advocating for Condi, I stand self-corrected and I note that Lynne Cheney likewise has never been elected on her own merits to office.
Ike had the military credentials which negated his lack of experience in running for elective office.
Condi does not.
The problem with Condi, and it's not her fault really, is that she has been tasked to implement someone else's policies. Condi may or may no have fully agreed with those polices.
Until she voices her own opinions in public to a greater degree, I'm not fully sure what here personal views are or what her own policies would be like.
During the recent war between the Israelis and Hezbollah, Condi voiced concern for civilian deaths and the need for a ceasefire. I found that disturbing.
When your ally goes after terrorists, you don't trip them on the way out the gate. When they're engaged, you don't lament colateral damage.
What you should be doing is laying down a firm reason why they are taking the actions they have. You then support that action based on a set of principles that cross national, cultural and religious boundaries.
We fail our allies when we fail to implement this type of supportive function. Who else is going to defend what is right on the world stage if we don't. How is support for Israel going to grow if no one explains why they are doing what they are doing, and then supports them publicly on reasoned grounds?
IMO, we failed Israel once again. Sadly, it's very appearant that we learned nothing from the process either. Now that it's clear that Hezbollah won't disarm and nobody is going to make them, our leaders remain silent.
We were hosed on this ceasefire. I don't see anyone acknowledging it and promising it won't happen again. Huge mistake.
Condie was mixed up in this. I want to know to what extent she agree with this policy. If she was fully on board, I wouldn't vote for her. It would say too much about what her world view was.
Now if she'll "soften" her views on abortion, I'll listen. Well, let me take that back. I don't want her to soften them. I want her to completely revamp them. Stringent pro-life, or I may not vote for her.
If Condi wins the nomination, I will gladly vote for her.
Well that is always a problem - usually a problem that Vice Presidents have to face. Bush Sr. overcame it. Gore didn't.
I agree that the ceasefire hosed us, and was bad for Israel and the US. But I am not sure that it was the US that pushed that line or merely gave Olmert a way out. IMHO, Olmert handed the US a problem and said 'get me out of it'. I am not so sure it was the other way around.
I do think the US was not pleased at all with the execution of the war. Israel did not have good intel at all. I think they thought they could soften it with air power and then go in for a mop up only to find they didn't soften anything and got hosed on the front lines when they went in, foretelling a long bitter conflict that Olmert didn't want and probably the US didn't want. The US wanted Iran on the agenda and perhaps saw Lebanon as a dry run.
Whether the perception here now strengthens Iran or not remains to be seen, but hopefully we can see this as Israel being 'sacrificed' if you will for the sake of a united front against Iran. Lebanon was a distraction but also an opportunity to bring France on board with the US, UK, Germany and others vis a vis Iran.
She's qualified- maybe overly qualified, but I don't think she wants it badly enough. Sadly, you have to WANT to practically kill for the presidency in order to win. (Note to Kennedys: I said "practically kill for", actually killing will count you out!)
I personally don't think 2008 is the right time simply because of all that is goin on in the world - it's too unstable. Condi has not shown well regarding Israel and personally it's gonna take an "in your face" guy like Rudy to tell the Saudis, Iranians, Syrians, N. Koreans, etc. to go shove it when the time comes. That time is coming! Although Clinton desperately wants the nomination and Presidency, world events are spinning away from her grasp and making her chances slimmer, not better as we approach 08...
I appreciate the comments. I think we're kidding ourselves if we think we're going to mop up the Iraq operation without neutering Syria and Iran.
Neither had The Hilderbeast when she ran for the Senate.
I think Rice & Bush know what they are doing with Israel. Our defense team is not stupid.
If the Israelis had just kept invading Lebanon - in very little time the whole world would have been calling Israel the "aggressor" and "baby killers" - totally forgetting what started it. (The world has a very short attention span). We know and Israel knows that the other side is not going to live up to the UN agreement.
Israel has already said that if there are any more attacks by Hezballah - Israel will destroy Lebanon.
They are just biding their time. When Hezballah resumes the attacks Israel can completely wipe them out and the UN and the rest of the world won't be able to say boo.
At least that's what I would do if I were running things.
We keep reading criticisms of Condi which say she has never done a national campaign.
Of all the Republicans who have done national campaigns, who among them is a decently electable conservative?
I do not include among that short list those who might be great conservative Presidents and who could adequately defend this nation but who don't stand a chance of a spark in a blizzard of getting elected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.