The Liberal Psychological Lynching Of Dr. Condoleezza Rice In The Media 
 

11-22-2004

Throughout the last few years, the elitist media has had a field day publicly denigrating members of President Bush's administration, especially John Ashcroft who has been characterized as Dracula so many times he should receive royalties from any future use of that character.

Though many Democrats and media elitists have exhausted numerous boxes of tissues as they attempt to stem the tide of their teardrops from the announcement that Colin Powell is leaving the State Department, even he was chided and sometimes attacked as being an 'Uncle Tom' who was serving on Bush's plantation.

Then president Bush did the most vile, disturbing, hateful thing he could have ever done as President of the United States...something no Republican should ever be allowed to do and the reason liberals knew that war-mongering, Jesus-loving, gay-bashing, Neanderthal should never have been elected President... he chose an African-American female confidant as Colin Powell's replacement.

Not only has a Republican President appointed an African-American woman to one of the highest Presidential Cabinet positions possible, something the last Democrat President had eight years in which he could have done the same thing and proved the Democrat mantra that they somehow care more about African-Americans than those racist Republicans, but... gasp... she agrees with President Bush's foreign policy!

And so the character assassination of Dr. Rice by media elitists began.

In the late Eighties, Dr. Rice, a graduate student in foreign policy, went to Washington D.C. as part of a Council on Foreign Relations fellowship to work on nuclear strategic planning at the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1989 she served as director of Soviet and East European affairs with the National Security Council and was special assistant of national security affairs for President George Herbert Walker Bush. Upon completing that assignment, she returned to Stanford as a member of the political science faculty, becoming the school's youngest and first female and first African-American, provost.

Yet according to defamatory editorials across the country and Democrat political pundits, Dr. Rice is either not qualified, is being used as a willing pawn (a 'yes' person), or just isn't capable, in these people's minds, to 'handle' the job. Many of these detractors also opine that it is so much better for an administration to have people who will descent from administration policy, yet they didn't assess that necessity during the Clinton White House years.

Several elitists, including political cartoonists, have vilified Dr. Rice by characterizing her using blatantly stereotypical, racist epithets or drawings and openly called her an 'Aunt Jemima'. What we have here is not a 'failure to communicate', but rather a loud-and-clear message of what true liberal compassion really means.

One paper characterized Dr. Rice's appointment as: 'THE HARDLINE RIGHT-WINGER PRESIDENT BUSH IS MAKING THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL WOMAN.' That column goes on to say the President is a 'monkey' and that, "almost everything he knows about foreign policy has been learnt from Condoleezza Rice." Either Dr. Rice mimics everything President Bush says, or she is pulling the strings. And no one has yet to explain how Vice President Dick Cheney lost his job as 'puppetmaster'.

Another editorial muddied the picture even more when the writer insisted, "It's that as national security adviser, she seemed to tell him [Bush] what he wanted to hear about decisions he'd already made, rather than what he needed to know to make sound judgments in the first place." If that's the case, then why does it matter who becomes Secretary of State?

We're also back to Democrat attacks that Dr. Rice scared the American public through Republicans wily tactic of using 'innuendo' when she said, "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud," as she referred to Saddam pursuing nuclear weapons. To which I reiterate that NO ONE should want to see a mushroom cloud before they accept that nuclear weapons have been acquired by a dictator who hates America!

Hello? That's not innuendo... that's common sense!

The New York Times was even more succinct when they intoned, " Ms. Rice, a former academic, has no real background in managing a vast bureaucracy or in hands-on diplomacy." The Times then decided to retract from that harsh rhetoric and ended by meekly implying that if she could just create a 'permanent peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians', she 'would have proved beyond argument that she deserved the president's - and the nation's - trust because of qualities far more important than knee-jerk loyalty.'

Or maybe she will turn on the President and do an exclusive interview for the next Michael Moore lie-laden attack movie, or write a tell-all insider's book on the incompetence of the administration, or at least leak some juicy documents to the press... yeah, that's the ticket! Dan Rather's gnawing his nails in anticipation like a rat pulling cheese from a rattrap.

There are some that are willing to speak out against the racist and simple-minded attacks on Dr. Rice such as the organization consisting of over 200 black clergy and members of the faith-based community who call themselves, The Faith Based Leadership Council (FBLC).

Executive director of the FBLC, Oliver N.E. Kellman, Jr., specifically addressed the political satirists saying in a statement, "These cartoonists believe that the liberal views of the Washington Post and New York Times somehow provides cover for them to engage in racist attacks upon Dr. Rice and other minorities in the Bush Administration." He continued in his statement that, "I am astonished that the NAACP, Rainbow-Push and other traditional civil rights groups did not denounce this type of trash from the very first day it was reported."

These groups obviously don't see a problem with this issue because Dr. Rice should be 'toeing-the-line' for liberal Democrats and their party, not Conservative Republicans. This sentiment was echoed by FBLC when they concluded, "White liberals in the media have come to feel that they can openly attack any Black conservative that chooses to serve the nation."

Justice Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court, a conservative black woman, was attacked in the same manner when she was nominated for the federal bench. Ditto, Justice Clarence Thomas. Why, it's okay for African-Americans to think, just as long as they think they are Democrats!

Liberal Democrats realize the paradox they are creating through their arguments against Dr. Rice, in which they are effectively denouncing the basic mandate of affirmative action. That is one of the main reasons these Democrats are so livid about Dr. Rice becoming Secretary of State and they probably figure they can utilize the ruse with the expectation that no one will notice.

You can't, one the one hand, champion the promotion of a person based solely on race, then speak out against someone who fits that criteria bemoaning ideological principles and continue to expect that you still have a semblance of credibility left. And yet, that is exactly what liberals have always been able to get away with and why they feel they can psychologically 'lynch' Dr. Rice through character assassination because they think they won't be held accountable.

Not any more.

Lee P Butler