Boxer outclassed in Condi dustup

Leave it to the left-wingers to trip over their tongues every time they try to throw more dirt on the Bush administration. The latest foolish assertion came from California Senator Barbara Boxer when she was questioning Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice. She said Ms. Rice might not recognize the horror of war because she has "no immediate family," a reference to the fact that Rice is single and has no children.

Radio talk show icon, Rush Limbaugh referred to the remarks as "hitting below the ovaries." Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we supposed to be living in an enlightened age? Since when did we begin to criticize women who have decided not to propagate? Does Ms. Boxer have more right to speak about the war in Iraq because she has offspring? Using that logic, women legislators without children should not be voting on issues like abortion because their lack of "immediate family" may suggest that they have already made up their minds on the issue. The same would apply to women who do have children. Hence, women would be left out of equation entirely.


Rice responded later in an interview by saying she thought single women had come further than that. Well, they have, unless one of them gets between a Democrat and President Bush. Then it becomes a free-for-all in which people like Boxer can spew up all that bile they've been accumulating as they wait for every opportunity to show their hatred for the president.


You have to wonder if these radical ideologues are actually hoping the US gets defeated in the war. Now that another 21,000 troops have been committed to Iraq, Dems are trying to figure out a way to keep them from being equipped. Since they can't keep Bush from sending them, they are flirting with the idea of cutting off the funds. The only reason they haven't already done so is because they fear the political implications, not that they truly care about the troops having the resources they need. For these radical extremists it has never been about concern for the lives lost in battle; it has been about damaging Bush and the GOP so that the Dems can take back the White House in 2008.


Meanwhile, Time Magazine has called it "the womb wars" and White House spokesman, Tony Snow referred to it as, "A great leap backwards for feminism." Yet, The New York Times, that staunch supporter of a woman's right to be independent, childless and upwardly mobile has evidently decided that the story is not fit to print. Of course, it would make the front page if Ms. Rice had been the one telling another woman that her childless status had no credibility regarding decisions about war. Bold headlines would proclaim: Secretary of State demeans pro-choice women. The editorial would certainly demand an apology from the Secretary, if not her resignation. This is what masquerades as non-partisanship in this country. The senator has no qualms about insulting Dr. Rice because, Boxer, like so many other left-wingers, deludes herself into believing that she is standing tall on the moral high ground.


The senator's comments were another uncomfortable reminder of the double standards between liberal and conservative women. It's similar when any black conservative has views that don't fall in line with his/her liberal counterparts. When blacks decided that they weren't going to be stereotyped into a universal political philosophy they were called Uncle Toms. Those who had the courage to speak out against the Jesse Jacksons and the Al Sharptons were labeled, Oreos; black on the outside and white on the inside. One can hardly utter a more racist statement than that. But when it's said by an African-American liberal the person gets a pigmentation pass. However, if the person is black and conservative, they will have every statement meticulously parsed in order to find a reason to demonize them; even if that person holds the most powerful foreign policy position in the world.


Dr. Rice frustrates the leftists in America because she is a black woman with an extraordinary education, impeccable credentials, eloquent oratory and a patriotic fervor that practically hair-lips the hate-America crowd. You see, in their distorted view of the world, Dr. Rice should be on their side. Why? Because she's black, and blacks are not supposed to think for themselves, they are supposed to follow the prevailing liberal wisdom. Controlling how blacks think used to be called slavery. Today, it's called being a good democrat.  

Bob Weir is a former detective sergeant in the New York City Police Department. He is the excutive editor of The News Connection in Highland Village, Texas. Email Bob.
Leave it to the left-wingers to trip over their tongues every time they try to throw more dirt on the Bush administration. The latest foolish assertion came from California Senator Barbara Boxer when she was questioning Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice. She said Ms. Rice might not recognize the horror of war because she has "no immediate family," a reference to the fact that Rice is single and has no children.

Radio talk show icon, Rush Limbaugh referred to the remarks as "hitting below the ovaries." Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we supposed to be living in an enlightened age? Since when did we begin to criticize women who have decided not to propagate? Does Ms. Boxer have more right to speak about the war in Iraq because she has offspring? Using that logic, women legislators without children should not be voting on issues like abortion because their lack of "immediate family" may suggest that they have already made up their minds on the issue. The same would apply to women who do have children. Hence, women would be left out of equation entirely.


Rice responded later in an interview by saying she thought single women had come further than that. Well, they have, unless one of them gets between a Democrat and President Bush. Then it becomes a free-for-all in which people like Boxer can spew up all that bile they've been accumulating as they wait for every opportunity to show their hatred for the president.


You have to wonder if these radical ideologues are actually hoping the US gets defeated in the war. Now that another 21,000 troops have been committed to Iraq, Dems are trying to figure out a way to keep them from being equipped. Since they can't keep Bush from sending them, they are flirting with the idea of cutting off the funds. The only reason they haven't already done so is because they fear the political implications, not that they truly care about the troops having the resources they need. For these radical extremists it has never been about concern for the lives lost in battle; it has been about damaging Bush and the GOP so that the Dems can take back the White House in 2008.


Meanwhile, Time Magazine has called it "the womb wars" and White House spokesman, Tony Snow referred to it as, "A great leap backwards for feminism." Yet, The New York Times, that staunch supporter of a woman's right to be independent, childless and upwardly mobile has evidently decided that the story is not fit to print. Of course, it would make the front page if Ms. Rice had been the one telling another woman that her childless status had no credibility regarding decisions about war. Bold headlines would proclaim: Secretary of State demeans pro-choice women. The editorial would certainly demand an apology from the Secretary, if not her resignation. This is what masquerades as non-partisanship in this country. The senator has no qualms about insulting Dr. Rice because, Boxer, like so many other left-wingers, deludes herself into believing that she is standing tall on the moral high ground.


The senator's comments were another uncomfortable reminder of the double standards between liberal and conservative women. It's similar when any black conservative has views that don't fall in line with his/her liberal counterparts. When blacks decided that they weren't going to be stereotyped into a universal political philosophy they were called Uncle Toms. Those who had the courage to speak out against the Jesse Jacksons and the Al Sharptons were labeled, Oreos; black on the outside and white on the inside. One can hardly utter a more racist statement than that. But when it's said by an African-American liberal the person gets a pigmentation pass. However, if the person is black and conservative, they will have every statement meticulously parsed in order to find a reason to demonize them; even if that person holds the most powerful foreign policy position in the world.


Dr. Rice frustrates the leftists in America because she is a black woman with an extraordinary education, impeccable credentials, eloquent oratory and a patriotic fervor that practically hair-lips the hate-America crowd. You see, in their distorted view of the world, Dr. Rice should be on their side. Why? Because she's black, and blacks are not supposed to think for themselves, they are supposed to follow the prevailing liberal wisdom. Controlling how blacks think used to be called slavery. Today, it's called being a good democrat.  

Bob Weir is a former detective sergeant in the New York City Police Department. He is the excutive editor of The News Connection in Highland Village, Texas. Email Bob.