Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Condoleezza Rice on 60 Minutes Live Thread [7pm EST, Sunday 3/28]
CBS News ^ | 3-28-04 | CBS News

Posted on 03/28/2004 2:57:31 PM PST by GraniteStateConservative

I was waiting for this to go up. We're about t-minus one hour from it (depending on how long Duke-Xavier goes, I guess). Too bad it's not going to be a long interview like Clarke had. I've noticed that 60 Minutes are not promoting this either. The commercial I just saw advertised the story on soccer phenom Freddy Adu, not the story on Rice or Pickering. I also discovered from the link referenced above that Rice spoke to them this morning and not yesterday as I'd heard would be the case before. Bill Kristol predicted this morning that Rice might say that if this is really such a big deal that she'll testify in public under oath as she's been badgered to do. I don't think Bill has a good track record on predicting news, so take that with a grain of salt. By the way, go Xavier-- I had Duke losing before now in my office pool bracket, but my opponents have them winning it all.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 60minutes; 911commission; condoleezzarice; richardclarke
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350 ... 601-608 next last
To: alnick
Guess they can afford to be generous on an issue their side has already won.
251 posted on 03/28/2004 4:57:27 PM PST by Triple Word Score (She's absolutely meretricious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: mass55th
You'll notice they called it a "best seller."

Unfortunately it's #1 right now on Amazon..

252 posted on 03/28/2004 4:57:27 PM PST by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: freedom4me
EXCELLENT! I hope they take you up on your idea.
253 posted on 03/28/2004 4:57:53 PM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Fawnn
Don't you love how they interview that Socialist jack*!$ Charles Schumer on TV like he is a fair. Unbelievable! This is why I have not watched this show in years. Its so far to the left, and pretends to be fair and balanced.
254 posted on 03/28/2004 4:58:00 PM PST by Sprite518
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
HUGE MISTAKE not having her testify. She is charismatic, intelligent, and a great spokeswoman for not only the administration's policies but the administration. So what do you now have? Our folks in Congress talking about perjury...but Rice won't even testify under oath. Clarke today saying let's declassify all of my previous tesimony and emails (see Google). The bottom line is: all this makes the administration look like it's trying to hide something and go after people who criticize it. Rice would blow them away and defuse this whole thing. If not a single national security advisor had ever testified publicaly under oath the administration could pull this off. I predict it's going to cost LOTS of swing votes and even more than what will already be lost if Clarke is prosectuted for perjury. If this was some boring, inarticulate, empty headed bureaucracy it'd be one thing. But one of the administration's most dynamic people, who has a lot of credibility that even Democrats can't eliminate, is being kept from testifying under oath...when her chief accuser has not only testified under oath but is saying all of his closed door testimony should be revealed and all of his emails. Except being on one side in this controversy, which side looks more OPEN to swing voters? Not the White House.
255 posted on 03/28/2004 4:58:55 PM PST by jraven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Cosmo
He never gave her a chance to expand on anything! I hope the White House learns something from this. The media has come together to get them out of office. The media doesn't even try to hide it.

Bradley was totally hostile!

256 posted on 03/28/2004 4:59:20 PM PST by BlueAngel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: windchime
Along with subjecting her to the boos and hisses of the 'select 9/11 families'.

Spot on. That's the simplest and best explanation I've seen about why Dr. Rice should not testify publicly.

257 posted on 03/28/2004 4:59:20 PM PST by lonevoice (Some things have to be believed to be seen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
The entire Kerry strategy is to ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK -- Kerry has never cared about anything except tearing down America. The Communists have understood this for 33 years, now the terrorists recognize it as well -- Kerry is their friend.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1106684/posts
258 posted on 03/28/2004 4:59:45 PM PST by jrlc (Just for Kerry - STOP THE BUSH BASHING)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
"Clarke is a Kerry op..."


I disagree; Clarke is a Clinton op. He is not only defending/building Slick's legacy and reputation via this book, but he's also innoculating Hillary AND...most important...making sure Dr. C. Rice will not ever be considered for the presidency. I continue to hope that most Americans can see through this entire charade, but I don't know...
259 posted on 03/28/2004 5:00:02 PM PST by Maria S (Assigned parking only...all violators will be towed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Trueblackman
Yes, we know that but unfortunately the finished product didn't change one mind or clear up the smoke screen that Clarke and the dems have thrown up.
260 posted on 03/28/2004 5:00:20 PM PST by Darlin' ("I will not forget this wound to my country." President George W Bush, 20 Sept 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: jraven
Okay, I can't even say you're wrong. I wish I could.

She should testify, but now they've made such a point of saying she can't...it's lose/lose.

If her simple word isn't good enough, her sworn oath wouldn't change anything anyway.
261 posted on 03/28/2004 5:00:28 PM PST by Triple Word Score (She's absolutely meretricious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
I bet the Dems are using their memos from the judiciary to make the 9/11 partisan tactics. The media no longer has significance as the fourth estate.

Is there a legal obligation for NBC, CBS or ABC to have news? Perhaps they should be released from obligation.
262 posted on 03/28/2004 5:01:08 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
"OMG. They have so far given more time to Clarke than they have to Condi!!!!!"


Bingo! But that's the way they planned and edited it...

263 posted on 03/28/2004 5:02:02 PM PST by Maria S (Assigned parking only...all violators will be towed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Trueblackman
I have to say Sixty Minutes just did a good job on the Pickering case. They showed Medgar Evers' brother ripping the Mississippi head of the NAACP. Evers' is supportive of Pickering.
264 posted on 03/28/2004 5:02:11 PM PST by Terry Mross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Incredible as it seems, they were actually fair to Pickering. I guess they decided to throw us a bone after the hatchet job on Rice.
265 posted on 03/28/2004 5:02:15 PM PST by alnick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
I just realized what is going on here regarding the interview timing (though it may be coincidence). Liberals and Blacks tune in to watch interview on Pickering and get a twofer. Bradley sliming Condi and then Pickering (by Schumer and Wallace).

The blacks interviewed that live in the south have a different view of a Pickering than the libs in Washington. Could it be that educated blacks in the south are more conservative than their brethren in the North? Or certainly not of the same mind, and think independently? Horrors!!

Opps. Only lasted a minute or two, than back to quoting blacks who opporse.
266 posted on 03/28/2004 5:02:38 PM PST by CedarDave (Election 2004: When Democrats attack, it's campaigning; when Republicans campaign, it's attacking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: smonk
"something pathetic about a 70 year old man wearing
an earring."

My thoughts exactly. If he had hair, he'd probably have one of those spiked looks. What a fool!
267 posted on 03/28/2004 5:03:02 PM PST by Ben Hecks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: jraven
Thank you for your opinion.
268 posted on 03/28/2004 5:03:37 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Sprite518
This is the first time I've watched this show in years, too. I now know why I've been avoiding it. I doubt I'll ever watch it again.

(I quit watching Tom Brocaw on NBC during the first Bush administration! While it isn't perfect, thank God for Fox News. And, I thank God even more for Free Republic and the Internet!)
269 posted on 03/28/2004 5:03:50 PM PST by Fawnn (Canteen wOOhOO Consultant and CookingWithPam.com person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Maria S
"most important...making sure Dr. C. Rice will not ever be considered for the presidency."

Bingo!! Actually - I bet they're hedging their bets for her not being Veep.
270 posted on 03/28/2004 5:04:00 PM PST by time4good
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers; Arrowhead1952
Time for Karen Hughes to be back in charge.

'Bout time.

271 posted on 03/28/2004 5:04:10 PM PST by txhurl (No offense to Condi; but Karen takes no prisoners (and enjoys it).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Triple Word Score
Most of what didn't hit the cutting room floor was Ed Bradley campaigning for Kerry.

...or Richard Clarke. Didn't know he was going to be interviewed today. Couldn't they make the show a bit more biased?

272 posted on 03/28/2004 5:05:12 PM PST by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: All
I'm on the West Coast and I was going to watch 60 minutes but after hearing the reviews I think I will listen to Drudge instead and save my blood pressure. CBS is scum. However I would like to know what Condi was wearing. She always looks so nice and professional.
273 posted on 03/28/2004 5:05:13 PM PST by ClarenceThomasfan ( We want a Bush landslide in November!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter
"Ed Bradley is presenting "persceptions and presumptions" as fact"

Exactly. Well, I'd say what kind of man I perceive and presume Ed Bradley to be but I fear I'd be banned.

274 posted on 03/28/2004 5:05:25 PM PST by Darlin' ("I will not forget this wound to my country." President George W Bush, 20 Sept 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: McGruff
"Ed Bradley looks sickly."
He looks like Uncle Ben with AIDS.
275 posted on 03/28/2004 5:06:18 PM PST by afz400
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: ClarenceThomasfan
Beautiful cream colored suit. She looked very nice.
276 posted on 03/28/2004 5:06:35 PM PST by babaloo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave
You'd be amazed at the number of conservative blacks here in Central Virginia. I sometimes think I know more conservative blacks than I do whites here in Charlottesville. But then, Charlottesville is fast becoming the Berkeley of the south.
277 posted on 03/28/2004 5:06:58 PM PST by Cosmo (Now, I ain't one to gossip, so you didn't hear this from me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
Karen Hughes will be back full time in about 6 weeks, things will tighten up when she is there on a daily basis.
278 posted on 03/28/2004 5:07:16 PM PST by Darlin' ("I will not forget this wound to my country." President George W Bush, 20 Sept 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
WHAT A HACK JOB!!!! I can not believe the WH, allowed these bozos over at cBS to do this to Condi.
279 posted on 03/28/2004 5:07:33 PM PST by shield (The Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God!!!! by Dr. H. Ross, Astrophysicist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Frankly, Condi could answer the reasons why President Bush asked about Iraq much better.

Folks, this is 60 Minutes, a wacko leftist program without any decorum or intelligence. Also, as many have pointed out, they are KNOWN for their editing.

Condi may very well have said everything we wanted to hear and more. Problem is, most of her interview was left on the editing room floor.

So, don't harp on Condi to much. My only criticism is that the administration should have KNOWN what the 60 Minutes crew would do to any administration interview.

280 posted on 03/28/2004 5:08:32 PM PST by technomage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: technomage
true enough.

but if you think most americans view 60 minutes as a "wacko leftist program", you are mistaken. its viewed as "mainstream".
281 posted on 03/28/2004 5:09:35 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
Yeah I saw that, but you know most people ducked out after the Rice Hit Piece.
282 posted on 03/28/2004 5:09:37 PM PST by Trueblackman (I want to be the 44th White President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: shield
Could the WH get the tape of the full interview and do a "here's what the public did not see" piece?
283 posted on 03/28/2004 5:09:40 PM PST by babaloo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Carolinamom
for education, his BS degree is in Education.

That figures.

bin Bradley is the same stupid jerk who did the hit piece in which the Audi 5000's "unintended acceleration" was scammed.

The damned BS network had drilled the Audi's transmission case and applied about 250 psi air pressure to cause "unintended acceleration".

They didn't reveal that either.

Condi did all right, but from now on, if I were the administration, I would insist "no editing".

And if bin Bradley doesn't like it, get another interviewer.

284 posted on 03/28/2004 5:11:06 PM PST by Ole Okie (John F'n Kerry: "He's a real nowhere man.." "Just a gigolo, everywhere I go....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: ClarenceThomasfan
Condi was wearing a beautiful white suit. High Collar, buttons down the front. She looked lovely but had a startled expression on her face, caused by Bradley's hostile questioning.
285 posted on 03/28/2004 5:11:18 PM PST by BlueAngel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: ClarenceThomasfan
Maybe I'm being nitpicky, but Condi's teeth are her least attractive feature -- and it sure seemed to me that their close-up focus on her focused on her teeth. I've never noticed them seem so prominent before. (At one point, I thought: I've always thought of Condi as a very beautiful woman, and if tonight were my first time seeing her, I'd probably have a less complimentary opinion of her appearance.)
286 posted on 03/28/2004 5:11:25 PM PST by Fawnn (Canteen wOOhOO Consultant and CookingWithPam.com person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: babaloo
...& her American flag pin. :) She seems such a sweet person. Strong, but sweet. I wish the media/lib piranhas would just back off.
287 posted on 03/28/2004 5:11:41 PM PST by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: All
WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE JUST SHUT UP?

I'm on the west coast, haven't seen the interview (and wont) but here we go again with the negativity, and I am getting sick of it.

You all seem to have expected Condi to draw blood, and that was not the point. The point was to go on the record refuting Clarke. It was not intended to be a slam-dunk on Clarke, just to get the other side in. From what I hear, the White House is fine with the interview.

Learn to manage your expectations, so you don't read like a bunch of losers whenever things don't go your way. Consider what is at stake here. When you folks go off whining about the administration not making you feel better from day-to-day, you only encourage the other side. We need to be more practical, people. This is a marathon, not a sprint.

Let the process play out.

How many times do I have to remind you that the Bush Administration has whipped the Democrats every time. Why do you let your moods shift every time some Liberal asshole does a hit-piece on our people. Did you ever expect different? Do you think the Administration is so stupid as to not know what they were walking into?

If you think 60 Minutes scored some points, ask yourself why you did not see promo after promo reminding people to tune in for the slaughter? I would remind all of you that your words are on display world wide. I haven't even seen it, but I can tell you by the lack of media coverage, Condi did just fine.

The media wants to deliver Condi to the 911 families, so they can heckle her, blame her as NSA for the attack. They want that video, and they are not going to get it. Condi WILL NOT testify publicly, so get over it.

Stop expecting home runs.

Just look at the scoreboard on November 2nd.

Above all else, STOP WHINING LIKE LOSERS AS IF THE MEDIA CONTROLS YOUR VERY THOUGHTS.

If you don't believe in the Bush Administration, stop your bitching and go join the other side.
288 posted on 03/28/2004 5:11:45 PM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: technomage
Is there any way we can pressure 60 Minutes to show the entire interview they did with Condi?

If they want full disclosure from the White House, why can't we demand it from them?
289 posted on 03/28/2004 5:12:01 PM PST by Triple Word Score (Ed Bradley Wears A Whizzinator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: babaloo
not if they didn't get the tape in hand right after the interview.
290 posted on 03/28/2004 5:12:22 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
but if you think most americans view 60 minutes as a "wacko leftist program", you are mistaken. its viewed as "mainstream"

Ummm, I do not believe I said I thought most Americans viewed 60 Minutes that way. I was giving my view of the show. Guess I have to preface everything I say on this board with:

"I believe that......".

291 posted on 03/28/2004 5:12:47 PM PST by technomage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Darlin'
<>Karen Hughes will be back full time in about 6 weeks, things will tighten up when she is there on a daily basis.

Best news I have heard today. Through the election I presume.

292 posted on 03/28/2004 5:12:50 PM PST by CedarDave (Election 2004: When Democrats attack, it's campaigning; when Republicans campaign, it's attacking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: afz400
No matter if he looks sickly, he asked some strong questions.
293 posted on 03/28/2004 5:12:54 PM PST by Bella
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: All
I know most people probably turned it off in anger, but the story on Pickering was really great. Schumer looked like the hugest idiot, and so did the NAACP.

They spent most of the time talking about how Pickering had fought for civil rights, working AGAINST the Klan. They even showed a picture of his daughter in one of the first integrated schools, and she was the only white girl in the picture. They had two black democrat lawyers saying how fair he was.

They listed item after item of all his accomplishments and then they discussed the cross-burning case. He explained his position why he did what he did. Then you had Schumer and the NAACP guy saying, "but he reduced the sentance of a cross-burner!" He must be racist. It was pathetic. The best part was when Medgar Evers (if I remember correctly) was arguing with the NAACP guy.

I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't seen it with my own two eyes. The Rice thing was horrible though. She didn't get to state her case at all.

294 posted on 03/28/2004 5:12:57 PM PST by LizJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
For anyone interested; three very good articles on Judge Pickering:

The Cross Burning Case: What Really Happened
The facts are far different from the Democratic spin.
January 9, 2003 10:10 a.m.
http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/york/york010903b.asp

Black Group Praises Recess Appointment of Judge Charles Pickering
1/16/04 5:22:00 PM To: National Desk
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=148-01162004


Nat Hentoff
The Ordeal of Charles Pickering
Are Times Editorials Fact-Checked?
October 17th, 2003 5:00
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0343/hentoff.php


295 posted on 03/28/2004 5:13:19 PM PST by Maria S (Assigned parking only...all violators will be towed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
When you've seen what they did to her, you will know why we feel the way we do.

We know Condi did better than what we saw.
296 posted on 03/28/2004 5:13:31 PM PST by Triple Word Score (Ed Bradley Wears A Whizzinator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: babaloo
Beautiful cream colored suit. She looked very nice.

Boink!

297 posted on 03/28/2004 5:13:41 PM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
Yet another hatchet job - as if anyone was expecting anything else?
298 posted on 03/28/2004 5:13:46 PM PST by mhking (Sporting News' pre-season pick? Cubs over Red Sox in 7... World ends next morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
I absolutely disagree with that statement, as I was in a discussion about this earlier this week. 60 mins in not viewed as "mainstream"......it is viewed as trash, and people who regularly watch it were ridiculed! (And these remarks were not from rabid Republicans, they were from people who have voted for both parties.) The only true believers in "60 mins" watch because it echoes back their own leftists beliefs.
299 posted on 03/28/2004 5:13:53 PM PST by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
What's this about no attacks 30 months prior to 9/11

Just the cost of doing business you know, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a blip on their radar.

300 posted on 03/28/2004 5:13:55 PM PST by swheats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350 ... 601-608 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson