Lame-Duck Presidency

  •  (1) |
  • 1 (11) |
  • 2 (469) |
  • 4 (1) |
  • 5 (2) |
  • 9 (17) |
  • A (1549) |
  • B (1165) |
  • C (1891) |
  • D (1003) |
  • E (1255) |
  • F (811) |
  • G (724) |
  • H (1023) |
  • I (1024) |
  • J (512) |
  • K (115) |
  • L (624) |
  • M (1176) |
  • N (608) |
  • O (250) |
  • P (2010) |
  • Q (55) |
  • R (1311) |
  • S (1210) |
  • T (772) |
  • U (259) |
  • V (407) |
  • W (633) |
  • x (3) |
  • Y (39) |
  • Z (14) |

Condoleeza Rice, Vice-President?

Those of you who have been reading this blog since the beginning, know where what I think about the relationship between Condoleezza Rice and George W. Bush. Which is why, I find this editorial at USA Today particularly provocative :

It's hard to think of a good reason [Dick Cheney] should remain in office and logical to assume that some Republicans are pushing him to leave. It could be on "doctor's orders." He's 65 with serious heart problems.

Bush then could name a vice presidential successor who they hope might be nominated and win in '08. But the appointment would need approval of both houses of Congress. With control shifting to the Democrats in January, time may be of the essence.

Likely on the short might-be list (alphabetically):

•Bill Frist, 54, Senate majority leader from Tennessee.

•Rudy Giuliani, 62, former mayor of New York City.

•John McCain, 70, U.S. senator from Arizona.

•Condoleeza Rice, 52, secretary of State.

You know what --it wouldn't shock me if this were true. Especially with the prospect of Dick Cheney's impeachment.

Whether the political-industrial machine or Big Conservative Media want it or not, the case for impeachment is still very real and very much on the table. So it wouldn't shock me if, just for the shock value, Bush let's Cheney go to have Condoleeza as his rightful successor.


liza's picture

| | | | | | | | | | | |

Lincoln Chafee : Manwhore or Prodigal Politico?

The lame-duck presidency of George W. Bush has begun with Lincoln Chafee 's rank breaking move.

Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee, who was defeated in this week's election, said he would block Bolton's nomination.

Chafee, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters that he did not believe Bolton's nomination would move forward without his support.

"The American people have spoken out against the president's agenda on a number of fronts, and presumably one of those is on foreign policy," the Rhode Island moderate told The Associated Press.

"And at this late stage in my term, I'm not going to endorse something the American people have spoke out against."

The committee, dominated 10-8 by Republicans, requires a majority vote to send the nomination to the Senate floor. A tie would be the same as a no vote.

After months of quietly stonewalling John Bolton's nomination, yet not strongly enough so as not to ruffle any Republican feathers, now Chafee finds the resolve to kick Bolton out. It seems the senator from Rhode Island finally grew a spine. Does this make him a prodigal politico? Has Lincoln Chafee sprouted a conscience and finally seen the moderate Republican light?


liza's picture

| | | | | | | |

Visit our sponsors

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Visit our sponsors

Upcoming events

Who's online

There are currently 2 users and 1258 guests online.

Online users

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Words to live by

I've essentially been driven out of activism, and being gainfully employed is much more attractive than being marginalized. Note this doesn't mean there are no benefits - it means it's not worth the costs. The fact that the skeptical side considers a weighing of positives and negatives, while the marketing side seems to follow a cultist reinforcement of only favorable evidence, inclines me to believe that the skeptical side is right and the marketing side is wrong.


Instant Congress

Don't know your Senators or US Representatives' phone numbers?
Enter your street address and zip code and find out right now.
Street number and name only:
Zip Code (5 digits):


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify