.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} < link rel="DCTERMS.replaces" href="http://www.publiusforum.com/illini/illinialliance_main.html" >



Digg!

Friday, January 12, 2007

 

Sec. Rice Attacked by Sen. Boxer Over Childlessness

-By Warner Todd Huston

Is it not outrageous that Senator Barbara Boxer (Dem, Cal) verbally attacked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for not having children as Rice appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday to discuss the Administrations position on Bush's Iraq military "surge" plans? Is this an acceptable criticism of a political official? Is the fact that an official might not have children reason to doubt their capacity for policy making or ability to advise an administration?

Is this the Democrat's new era of niceness, their less rancorous way of governing?

I was shocked to see this intemperate verbal assault by Boxer in the New York Post, but I became curious to see how other MSM sources treated the outrageous comments of the unbalanced Boxer. So, I did a little search of the reactions of the press.

(Full excerpts of the sections in each story that detailed Boxer's outrageous behavior follows)

I said "full excerpts" as if there would be a lot of stories about Boxer's attack, didn't I? In fact, few of the dozens of stories of Rice's appearance before the committee even mentioned Boxer's foolish attack.

As you can see, only the New York Post seemed too interested in the outrageous Boxer. The rest of our "News" sources barely mentioned it and it seems that no original writing was spent on the issue with every major news source just aping the AP's two subdued accounts.

As contrasted with the above AP reports, here is how the Post started off their report on the exchange:

WASHINGTON - Condoleezza Rice came under a shocking Democratic attack yesterday - as a childless woman who can’t understand the sacrifices made by families of U.S. troops in Iraq. In a bitter personal assault on the secretary of state during her appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, anti-war Sen. Barbara Boxer fumed that Rice didn't comprehend the "price" of the war.

Only the Post, so far, seems willing to highlight Boxer's unsuitable comportment as a Senator.

It was also curious to me that most of these stories about Rice being "grilled" before the Senate committee -- even the ones that did not mention Boxer -- also went on to describe how well received Defense Secretary Robert Gates was as if to assure the reader that Rice's mistreatment was some how "balanced" by Gates' easy day on the Hill.

Still, it is amazing how Boxer has basically gotten a pass by the MSM for her boorish, uncivilized, and completely illogical attack on Secretary Rice's childlessness.

This must be just another example of how the Democrats are going to be more bi-partisan and less rancorous and how the MSM is going to help them achieve that... or, rather, how they aren't and how the MSM is going to help cover it up for them?

Sadly, the American public is ill served by the MSM, once again.



*This same AP report showed up in several sources. For instance CBS News, The Guardian Unlimited and the Kansas City Star, among others, used this AP report.

**This same AP report showed up in several sources. For instance, the San Francisco Chronicle, Houston Chronicle, and the Guardian Unlimited, among others, all used this report.

Labels: , , , , ,


Comments:
Boxer didn't "attack" Rice for being unmarried or childless. Those are facts, and Boxer was observing that neither she nor Rice have immediate family members at risk in the Iraq War, a valid point that applies as well to other key administration officials whose young adult family members apparently have "other priorities".

Noting that someone is unmarried and childless is only a problem if that status is viewed as something negative. Apparently that's the case in the Republican circles that are bloviating over this non-issue.
 
It was an attack because the point was... well... POINTLESS to make. Few politicians actually have anyone involved in the fight. That is often the case in a democracy.

Further, the founders created a system where such things are the NORM and WANTED it that way.

For you to cover for Boxer's ignorance with an example of your own is sad.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home






Ring of Conservative Sites Ring of Conservative Sites
JOIN!

[ Prev | Skip Prev | Prev 5 | List |
Rand | Next 5 | Skip Next | Next ]

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?