What qualifies a person to be President of the United States?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Xavier,
How could she have helped prevent 9-11?

She had information that an attack was coming. Hitler had plans for suicidal attacks with aircraft on Manhattan skyscrapers.

She was NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, and yet she did not advise. She did doodly-squat. It happened on her watch, and she blew it, bigtime.

As for Clinton, it didn't happen on his watch, so forget ranting about him.

She is an expert on the USSR. Putting her in a secretary of state was like hiring a horsecar conductor as chauffeur.

She wasn't qualified, she still isn't (though more than Juniorbush and Cheney are qualified for the jobs they have: they are utterly, unimaginably incompetent),

Colin Powell was competent and well-trained to be Secretary of State, and he knew what to do, but he was never listened to.

As for her being "articulate", no, she is not a great deliverer of speeches, and the ones she delivers she does not write, anyway. If you want an articulate Black person, I'd go with James Earl Jones or Morgan Freeman.

She will return to academia, write a book or two (with the help of a ghostwriter), or perhaps get some cushy job at a rightwing thinktank.  She will not stick around to spit in the soup and crap in the punchbowl like Henry (the Thing that Will Not Die) Kissinger, and that's a good thing.

It's all over for Rice.

[Cynthia]

As for Clinton, it didn't happen on his watch, so forget ranting about him.


XO,

Ranting about him? Ha!

He's the weakest link in this scenario in terms of IT happening. IT(9-11) happened, Xavier because of many factors,and yet you continue to rant that 'IT' was on the shoulders of Condoleezza Rice.


IT happened because Clinton was not "competent" enough to pay closer attention. My god,  he was the leader and buck stopper.....for 8 years.

Hail to Condi...She'll have the grace, intelligence and class to prevail a hell of a lot longer than Clinton ever will in terms of competence.

Write on...Condi. Her legacy in terms of "leadership" far outweighs most......and her contributions towards a positive approach for helping other countries will last longer. Her legacy will never "be over".....

Clinton, on the other hand was a player with his head in the ............sand.


It's not over for him...his legacy will forever be tarnished because he failed to take the lead when he had many a chance to do so.

[yellow_crane]

Xavier,
How could she have helped prevent 9-11?

She had information that an attack was coming. Hitler had plans for suicidal attacks with aircraft on Manhattan skyscrapers.

She was NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, and yet she did not advise. She did doodly-squat. It happened on her watch, and she blew it, bigtime.

As for Clinton, it didn't happen on his watch, so forget ranting about him.

She is an expert on the USSR. Putting her in a secretary of state was like hiring a horsecar conductor as chauffeur.

She wasn't qualified, she still isn't (though more than Juniorbush and Cheney are qualified for the jobs they have: they are utterly, unimaginably incompetent),

Colin Powell was competent and well-trained to be Secretary of State, and he knew what to do, but he was never listened to.

As for her being "articulate", no, she is not a great deliverer of speeches, and the ones she delivers she does not write, anyway. If you want an articulate Black person, I'd go with James Earl Jones or Morgan Freeman.

She will return to academia, write a book or two (with the help of a ghostwriter), or perhaps get some cushy job at a rightwing thinktank.  She will not stick around to spit in the soup and crap in the punchbowl like Henry (the Thing that Will Not Die) Kissinger, and that's a good thing.

It's all over for Rice.

A furthur word on "articulate" seems to be that you can assign the word only to those with whom you agree, by your lights.

That is wrong.

It is as neutral to good or bad as "brilliant."

In denying that Rice is "articulate" you fail to give the devil her due, by my lights.  I have watched her being interviewed and wondered at her ability to respond with a sound, immediate sophisticated flow of articulation.  Beyond the ability to express yourself to issue, defining "articulate" has to include the concept of "on your feet" as well.  This would be especially true in politics, as it is in aplomb of counsel in the courtroom.  This is not exactly the same thing as making a good speech.  The Latin source of the word is "be jointed, forming a joint or joints."

I have always assumed you to be a good teacher, but sometimes I wonder how objective you would be come grade time.

Consider Alan Keyes debating Morgan Freeman.  Despite the fact that they share a great deal in agreement in politics, I cannot see Freeman able to keep up at all in a LIVE debate.

Keyes and what he slithers for are despicable, but his articulation factor, like Rice's, shines.

[Cynthia]

Would like to consider Keyes and many more viable aspects of the issue, but I have to go back to work tomorrow morning and I won't be able to reply for a while.....

Deep in lesson planning and hoop jumping for NCLB......trust me it takes a village to run the machines around here. . especially with such a poor "State" of affairs here in NM.

But, I'll keep in touch.

T'was fun.

Cynthia