Classical Values :: McCain/Rice?

February 13, 2008

McCain/Rice?

Nicholas von Hoffman thinks it would be an unbeatable combination:

Rice's presence on the ticket deprives the Democrats of the we-are-more-diverse-than-thou argument. It makes McCain--whose ethnically diverse family includes an adopted daughter from Bangladesh--an even more attractive candidate for a certain kind of independent voter.

Rice can rightly be attacked for serving Bush and backing an unpopular and disastrous war. But McCain, who is extremely pro-war himself, is not going to select a running mate who is wishy-washy on Iraq. Rice is also said to have done a poor job running the State Department, where morale is supposed to have dropped faster than a subprime mortgage. However, you can put the number of voters who give a rodent's behind about the care and feeding of cookie-pushing diplomats in a phone booth, if phone booths still existed.

With Rice on the ticket the Republicans are freed up to run a much stronger negative campaign against either Clinton or Obama because the Secretary of State provides them with cover against charges of sexism or racism. They would be able to go after Obama's membership in Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., with whom Obama is close, has won himself the militant tag from conservatives because of his association with Nation of Islam leader the Rev. Louis Farrakhan.

(Via Real Clear Politics.)

He also adresses how it would offset Hillary's pretense of being an independent woman, and more.

Fine. I'm sold on the McCain/Rice ticket. (I already said I'd vote for a Thompson/Rice ticket.)

More importantly, so is Richard Land, of the Southern Baptist Convention. But what about Condoleezza Rice (who has already said she would not run for president)?

They can't just put her on the ticket without her consent, can they?

UPDATE: My thanks to Clayton Cramer for the link!

posted by Eric on 02.13.08 at 06:36 PM

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/6211

Comments

I want some of what he's smoking. Naming Rice as VP would be pandering of the worse sort, since nobody is going to believe that she got picked on her merits, and she really hasn't been a success as Sec. of State to boot.

Eric Blair · February 13, 2008 07:01 PM

the State Dept is notorious for being its own realm, totally opposed to any "outside" leadership. They merely hunker down and wait out the politicians while cutting the knees out from under anyone that would challenge their "culture"

I count it as a plus that Condi has the career State Dept citizens of the world employees annoyed.

Darleen · February 14, 2008 12:02 AM

Hooray! That's just what the GOP needs to get back in the running: Identity Politics! What a GREAT idea.

Next we can start naming Approved Victim Groups.

Unbelievable.

If skin color is the deciding factor, why not at least pick Michael Steele. Granted unlike Rice he doesn't have a vagina, but also unlike Rice he isn't a complete disaster.

guy · February 14, 2008 12:05 AM

Rice is clearly more intelligent than all of the pres. candidates. She should be a VP to someone...if McCain, then she might actually be pres. if he croaks in office. Wow.

Samantha · February 14, 2008 09:34 AM

Since politicians live and die by pandering, and since voters continually encourage them to do it, this argument is a non-starter. If she is qualified, and more importantly, willing, then it would be irresponsible to let the Democrats corner the market on pandering in identity politics.

Steele has less national recognition, but is also less "tainted" by service in the Bush administration.

Chris · February 14, 2008 10:33 AM

I would vote for a Rice anybody ticket. Morale only dropped because all of the senior bureaucrats at the State Department are Liberal Appointees left over from the Clinton Era (think 10 year lag time for Government jobs)

She is an amazing individual no matter how you think of it.

It is not pandering in any way. she is far more qualified on many fronts than many other choices.

Jim C · February 18, 2008 04:26 PM

Rice has never really run anything.

She has never held elective office.

The only intellectual principles she seemed to have she put aside in service of GWB.

As far as I can see, the only criterion to which she is the answer is, "Prove that the Republican party has gender/racial diversity." In my opinion, that's not good enough.

Neal J. King · February 24, 2008 09:47 AM

Rice rocks. What she wrote before GWB was fantastic. Obviously, she was outnumbered by idiots like Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and Cheney.

She should quit her position now, distance herself from GWB, and run as McCain's VP. With her high IQ, the Republicans could use a very negative campaign on either Hillary or Obama. She would blast them out of the water.

David C · February 26, 2008 05:11 PM