Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
I realize I'll probably be burned in effigy for this on here, but here goes. I would support Romney choosing Condoleezza Rice as his VP running mate, despite the fact that the life issue is tied at the top of my list with national security and the economy. I see two down sides, but several upsides to her selection.
Cons: 1) Granted she is not pro-life. But neither is she a NARAL ideologue. I recall no substantive commentary from her regarding this issue when she was either National Security Adviser or Secretary of State. As Secretary of State, she in no way subverted Bush 43 policies to cut pro-abortion funding in USAID packages. While I wish she were unabashedly pro-life (which, given Planned Parenthood's eugenic origins, I can't understand why any African-American wouldn't be, especially a woman) the unfortunate fact that she describes herself as pro-choice is outweighed by the pros she brings (see infra). 2) She isn't a firebrand and won't fire up the Tea Party/pro-life base. Well, I consider myself a Pro-Life Tea Partier, so I'm not sure that is true. However, even if you, my fellow Tea Party/pro-lifers aren't dancing in the streets, are you really going to not vote for Mitt with all that is at stake this election? Please. Politics is about compromise, within reason. The numbers are trending our direction on the life issue, eventually we will re-take America on that. Let's have some, what we would call in the Army "operational patience". Despite its moral indefensibility, there are still large percentages of Americans who are pro-choice on the issue. A selection of Condi would be well received by them. I admit, how that demographic would break is highly speculative. Her intellect and sobriety, and gravitas in foreign affairs, though, would add substantially to the narrative "the grown ups are coming back to Washington" that someone (Mr. Goldberg?) mentioned on yesterday's podcast.
Pros: 1) Full disclosure-- I am an Army OIF and OEF vet (Combat Engineer). I am a hawkish neocon. I like her. In fact I love her. If I weren't married I would court her something fierce. As Victor Davis Hanson published in NRO today, we are witnessing a seismic shift in global affairs. This is not time for on the job training with Iran, North Korea, Syria, Russia (she has deep expertise in former Soviet sphere) and the the global network of homicidal jihadis. Foreign policy is not Romney's strong suit, she would remedy that with expertise and articulation to spare (granted she may do more good back as National Security Adviser or Secretary of State, but--). 2) She evaporates any sexism charge. 3) She evaporates any racism charge. 4) She has an incredibly inspirational American success story, if allowed to be told boldly, it might finally break the back of the Democrats' stranglehold on the African-American community. 5) Did I mention I love her?
OK. Fire when ready. I can take it. Don't hold back.
- Comment (71)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Oct '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
If he picks her, I'm obviously going to vote for him. However, she wouldn't be my first pick, and according to Robert Costa at Nation Review, the Romney campaign denies that they're considering Rice.
Oct '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
I should add that the arguments you make in her favor are good ones.
Sep '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Burning someone in effigy sounds like a lot of work. I'm shaking my fist in disapproval at you instead.
Oct '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
No effigies - Romney will reach to the right for the veep and that's not Condi - at least domestically. I think it'll be Pawlenty but I would prefer Paul Ryan.
Jun '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Please God, Ryan over Pawlenty. I won't be upset if he doesn't pick Condi, but I like the the thought of him doing so. This probably all just a trial balloon, as many have said, and I am sure my thoughts on it are not the best bellweather. I just had to ring in my 2 cents in favor.
Jul '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Condi is an excellent pick... for any year other than this. She has impeccable credentials (I mean wow, look at her CV!), she is as sharp as they come, and most importantly, she has extensive foreign policy/government experience.
Now, brilliant and over-qualified does not equal exciting. With Romney on top, I remain personally convinced that we need conservative AND exciting on the bottom of the ticket. This has always been my problem with the notion of Portman as the pick; I remain unconvinced that we can have such a bland ticket and hope for victory. We need a conservative with passion, who speaks passionately and can sell people. I just don't think that is Condi or Portman at this point.
Edited on July 13, 2012 at 5:43pmJan '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Cornelius Julius Sebastian:
Pros: 1) Full disclosure-- I am an Army OIF and OEF vet (Combat Engineer). I am a hawkish neocon... As Victor Davis Hanson published in NRO today, we are witnessing a seismic shift in global affairs. This is not time for on the job training with Iran, North Korea, Syria, Russia (she has deep expertise in former Soviet sphere) and the the global network of homicidal jihadis. Foreign policy is not Romney's strong suit, she would remedy that with expertise and articulation to spare.
Forgive my glibness, but Secretary Rice's record in the Bush Administration does not demonstrate the kind of experience Romney needs. We tried it once, and it didn't work.
I confess to being consistently underwhelmed by Rice. I always think I should be impressed by her, but I can't think of a single thing she's ever said or done that's ever actually impressed me. She's got an incredible resume -- and an amazing personal story -- but remarkably little to show for it.
Rice is impressive for who she is, not for what she's done.
Edited on July 13, 2012 at 5:56pmJun '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
J.Voss: Now, brilliant and over-qualified does not equal exciting. With Romney on top, I remain personally convinced that we need conservative AND exciting on the bottom of the ticket. This has always been my problem with the notion of Portman as the pick; I remain unconvinced that we can have such a bland ticket and hope for victory. We need a conservative with passion, who speaks passionately and can sell people. I just don't think that is Condi or Portman at this point. · 7 minutes ago
Edited 7 minutes ago
Concur on Portman. Good guy, but the only white guy I think that approaches what we need is Paul Ryan. Although I like the thought of a Romney/Ryan ticket, I worry about the way white guy/white guy comes across. Ryan is arguably polarizing. In the end though, I'm voting GOP regardless.
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
In judging a vice-presidential pick, one should ask, "Is this the person best qualified to take over if the President dies?"
Condoleeza Rice has one advantage in this department. She is familiar with our foreign-policy situation. That is important -- very important.
But what about domestic affairs? We are now in a pickle, and we desperately need to dig ourselves out. What does Rice know? What does she think?
And what sort of Supreme Court picks would she make if she were to become President? I shudder to think.
As you no doubt know, I worry that, if he is elected, Mitt Romney will turn out to be about as conservative as Mayor Bloomberg -- which is to say, that he will do good work on fiscal matters and sell us down the river in every other particular. There is nothing in his record in Massachusetts to suggest otherwise. I am not alone in my worries, to say the least. Choosing Condoleeza Rice as his runnning mate would serve to deepen my fears and those of many others as well.
He should consider making her Secretary of Defense. Paul Ryan should be his running mate.
Feb '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
My sentiments are similar to Tom Meyer's. I appreciate Rice's contributions to her country in National Security and State, but I find her slightly disappointing when I listen to her, even on Uncommon Knowledge.
She is smart, certainly, and she is not a push-over, but she leaves me wanting more. Like Romney, she fails to make me fired up about her, wishing that she had a little more oomph.
I kind of feel about Paul Ryan like you do about Rice, Cornelius.
I can't wait to get into a voting booth and pull the lever for Romney and whoever, but I know in my heart of hearts that I will mostly be voting against the current President rather than for the Republican ticket.
Jun '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Fair critique on domestic/econ and SCOTUS, Mr. Rahe.
Oct '10
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
She has never held, nor sought elective office. She has no executive experience whatsoever (I do not consider being provost of a university or Secretary of State an executive post: both are subordinates who implement the policies of their superiors and who do not have bottom-line financial responsibility). She has zero experience in retail politics, and no track record of which I am aware as a debater and attack dog, which is part of the traditional rôle of the VP candidate. She hails from a state which has precisely 0% probability of being carried by the ticket due to her nomination.
Dr. Rice is a distinguished scholar and thinker about international affairs, but I see no evidence she has the rabid dog fight instinct which the coming contest will require, especially since the top of the ticket seems weak in that regard.
Jul '10
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Has she ever had a job outside of the academy or government? That is a principal criticism of the Obama team of amateurs. Why go down the same road?
Mar '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
I think the issue is different than it was presented. I don't for a minute believe that one is pro-life except when one is not pro-life. It is not a suit of clothes to put on and then take off as the day goes on.
I am pro-life all the time in regard to abortion. I won't be voting for a pro-abort candidate. If we are no longer attempting to preserve this country for human beings in utero, then I won't pretend it is worth preservation by voting against my principles.
Once one votes for a pro-abort politician, one has made the transition and it will be more easily handled in future votes.
Pro-life? Really? When?
I am pro-life when it counts, otherwise it is mere noise.
Jun '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Tom and Mama-- a little hard to hear, but you aren't impressed by this? http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/audio-exclusive-the-speech-that-landed-condi-on-r
Edited on July 13, 2012 at 6:23pmApr '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Paul A. Rahe:
He should consider making her Secretary of Defense. Paul Ryan should be his running mate. · 8 minutes ago
I couldn't agree with you more Dr Rahe on the Ryan for V.P. pick. (I also hope your health is good by the way). Hearing him wax eloquently on the healthcare bill vote and repeal strategy recently, I can't help but wish him out daily on the campaign trail speaking principled truths.
My only concern is would he be marginalized by Romney and his staff once in office.
Jun '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
@ John Walker: I don't think lack of retail politics is necessarily a disadvantage (Obama was fairly seasoned in retail politics). I agree she won't swing any particular state or states, but she might swing a demographic across a variety of states.
May '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
What evidence do you have for thinking that a Condi pick would insulate the party from charges of racism or sexism? When has that ever happened? Clarence Thomas? Herman Cain? Allen West? Or how about Palin, Bachmann, or Haley?
It doesn't matter what we do or who we pick, the left's narrative is that the right is racist, misogynist, and homophobic. The sooner we quit playing by their rules, the better.
Jun '12
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Donald Todd: I am pro-life all the time in regard to abortion. I won't be voting for a pro-abort candidate. If we are no longer attempting to preserve this country for human beings in utero, then I won't pretend it is worth preservation by voting against my principles.
I am pro-life when it counts, otherwise it is mere noise. · 17 minutes ago
I salute your purity on the issue. Though I would bet that somewhere, in the investments you make, in the products you buy, in the enterntainment you watch, you somewhere, somehow have supported the pro-choice side, at least indirectly. Its sad but true and we all have. Let me ask you this-- how is giving Obama one net vote more (by your not voting for Romney/Rice) forwarding the pro-life agenda?
Apr '11
Re: Pro-Life Catholic for Condi
Donald Todd: I think the issue is different than it was presented. I don't for a minute believe that one is pro-life except when one is not pro-life. It is not a suit of clothes to put on and then take off as the day goes on.
I am pro-life all the time in regard to abortion. I won't be voting for a pro-abort candidate. If we are no longer attempting to preserve this country for human beings in utero, then I won't pretend it is worth preservation by voting against my principles.
Once one votes for a pro-abort politician, one has made the transition and it will be more easily handled in future votes.
Pro-life? Really? When?
I am pro-life when it counts, otherwise it is mere noise. · 19 minutes ago
Just curious, if your candidate meets all your pro-life position criteria, gets elected and does nothing to stem the abortion tide, does your vote still remain principled or do you deem it wasted.
Unprincipled candidates can still take principled actions, wouldn't you agree?