Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

The discussion, at its most intellectually honest, would involve people taking it as a GIVEN that she 1) is a right winger who is dissociated from the AA community, and was involved very deeply in the Bush administration's worst activities; and 2) has a compelling story of growth, academic and career achievement, and rise to prominence and power, regardless of the politics. To disparage the very existence of either of these two truths about Condi is disingenuous. It seems to me that there are arguments to be made one way or another, even when being intellectually honest about it.


Disparaging facts, even incongruous facts, would certainly be intellectually dishonest..

But dialogue should not cease with the presentation and accurate acknowledgment of factual information... certainly one should be allowed in dialogue to analyze and evaluate such facts to form a conclusion as to the deemed weight and worth of each... and enter this opinion as well...
Absolutely. Not only "should they be allowed to do so" (which should go w/o saying), my point was that they should do exactly that.

quote:
Here, imo, her stellar personal academic/political accomplishments pale in comparison to supporting, lying and misleading an entire country into war and further financial hardship under false pretenses which have given rise to suspicions of a possible pawn role (and what a glorious/pretty role it would be eh?)in a right wing xenophobic and greedy agenda...
Now, does this mean she doesn't/shouldn't have relevance to the black community?

What does "relevant" mean in this context?


positive or negative relevance?



Joe Louis was a lover of white women but also an abusive man (I think he almost killed Lena Horne once), who is most lauded for his accomplishments as a boxer and his ability to stand up to racism...

Ones assessment of him depends upon the weight they give each trait...

Does overcoming racism hold more weight than abusing women? To some it does..

He is still relevant, but if you are of the former mindset, you will pay short shrift to the latter...

If you value intellectual prowess and political savvy over war crimes (loss of life etc.. ) then you will see her legacy and relevance primarily in a positive light... and its potency will tend to overshadow other parts of her legacy...
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:


In contrast, negrospiritual, I can get with the above quote because at least there is a recognition of *stellar* in her academic biography. And for the record - I actually AGREE with the above sentiment, but I'll never go around saying that the woman didn't HAVE the credentials to do her job.

It's ludicrous to be that blinded by ideology.



This is moot since in that very same post - I outlined her credentials that i was aware of, and even posted the schools that she had attended. So you could not possibly have deduced from that that i believe she had no educational achievement Roll Eyes

My point was not that literally, she doesn't have any degrees...but rather, that I don't believe she has any credentials that would EXCUSE her from being a war criminal. If so, WHAT WOULD THOSE CREDENTIALS BE?
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
Dr. Rice is very relevant as a role model as well as a cautionary tale for African-Americans.

Children (and some adults) can emulate her drive, focus and accomplishments. Adults can ponder the complexities of life that lead an African-American woman to Dr. Rice's current political bent.


IMO, this is an outstanding post. To me, this is the definitive statement on the point.

If this were "Answers.yahoo.com" (or whatever it is) instead of aa.org, this would get my vote for "Best Answer."
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
"hifalutin edumacation".


This attitude kills our community. bang


Not necessarily, it depends on the context with which the attitude is read and knowledge of the poster stating it...

If this attitude is held by someone who uses it as an excuse not to utilize the resources of this society to advance then yes.. it is a problem...

However, NS is a person who has attained a higher education than many in our community, so I doubt this is from the context she speaks..

It seems to be stated in contempt for dialogue of a seemingly narrowly focused high admiration of Ms. Rice's personal accomplishments outside of the context of the use of her accomplishments in heinous ways detrimental to society...
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
"hifalutin edumacation".


This attitude kills our community. bang


Not necessarily, it depends on the context with which the attitude is read and knowledge of the poster stating it...

If this attitude is held by someone who uses it as an excuse not to utilize the resources of this society to advance then yes.. it is a problem...

However, NS is a person who has attained a higher education than many in our community, so I doubt this is from the context she speaks..

It seems to be stated in contempt for dialogue of a seemingly narrowly focused high admiration of Ms. Rice's personal accomplishments outside of the context of the use of her accomplishments in heinous ways detrimental to society...



yeah
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

I hope the above has clarified for you what's actually being said here.

Thanks ever so much Vox! eyes Gawd knows, us lil ole master's degree holders need Ph.d/JD level interpreters to understand the "relevance" of condoleeza rice Roll Eyes

Land sakes! ever what would we'uns do wiffout ya? sck


Are you ascribing again, NS? You said something about "credential worshipping." I tried to clarify that that wasn't the case, by explaining the role her creds play in the analysis. You keep on "ascribing." You don't know me for you to be doing that.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
I am aware that she has a Ph.d and has served as a Provost, as well as having been groomed by the bush family, serving on their board of directors and having an oil tanker named after her. She was hand-picked by Daddy Bush to bring Dumbya up to speed on Russian relations/foreign policy yet, she didn't frequently travel to russia and relations with russia deteriorated during her tenure...

Does she have some "credentials" that i'm unaware of


Yes. She graduated from one of the top universities in the world and long before "daddy Bush" handpicked her for his son, she was a foreign policy expert for Ronald Reagan's 1st administration.

She was one of the youngest professors to gain tenure at Stanford and managed the assets of that university (without major critique) for years.

Those are her credentials. They have nothing to do with her ideology.


Black ideologues crack me up.


which one of us are you attempting to characterize as a "black idealogue" and what does WAR CRIMINAL have to do with black ideology?


You don't like her because she is an republican, you likely would if she was Dem. She supported a war against non blacks, that has no absolutely no reflection on her blackness. plenty black supported the war.



What evidence do you have to support your premise that i "don't like" Condoleeza Rice because she is a republican?

And while you are at it, answer the question of how a person who can dismiss an elective war which violated international conventions, simply because the majority of the victims were nonblack, can ever open their mouth to label someone else as a black idealogue? 20

We won't even bother with the fact that there are indeed black iraqi's....

Roll Eyes

Considering you listed her with other Black repubs I think it rather obvious you are biased. Of course you never pointed out anything anti-Black she has done.
I think it clear I meant political ideologue since I was talking dems and repubs. So yes indeed I find black ideolouge amusing. Tailing behind liberals makes you no more black than tailing behind conservatives. You are closer to indicting yourself for calling a black irrelevent because they follow a different group of whites than you.
Anyway, I like your snarkiness and I find it somewhat amusing but that won't hide your lack of substance. What does her support for the war on Iraq has to do with her relevance to the Black community?
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

I hope the above has clarified for you what's actually being said here.

Thanks ever so much Vox! eyes Gawd knows, us lil ole master's degree holders need Ph.d/JD level interpreters to understand the "relevance" of condoleeza rice Roll Eyes

Land sakes! ever what would we'uns do wiffout ya? sck


Are you ascribing again, NS? You said something about "credential worshipping." I tried to clarify that that wasn't the case, by explaining the role her creds play in the analysis. You keep on "ascribing." You don't know me for you to be doing that.



Nor do I care to know you. Nope, that would make you relevant... Roll Eyes

I understand clearly that some africanamericans are willing to excuse war crimes if the perpetrator is highly educated.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
I am aware that she has a Ph.d and has served as a Provost, as well as having been groomed by the bush family, serving on their board of directors and having an oil tanker named after her. She was hand-picked by Daddy Bush to bring Dumbya up to speed on Russian relations/foreign policy yet, she didn't frequently travel to russia and relations with russia deteriorated during her tenure...

Does she have some "credentials" that i'm unaware of


Yes. She graduated from one of the top universities in the world and long before "daddy Bush" handpicked her for his son, she was a foreign policy expert for Ronald Reagan's 1st administration.

She was one of the youngest professors to gain tenure at Stanford and managed the assets of that university (without major critique) for years.

Those are her credentials. They have nothing to do with her ideology.


Black ideologues crack me up.


which one of us are you attempting to characterize as a "black idealogue" and what does WAR CRIMINAL have to do with black ideology?


You don't like her because she is an republican, you likely would if she was Dem. She supported a war against non blacks, that has no absolutely no reflection on her blackness. plenty black supported the war.



What evidence do you have to support your premise that i "don't like" Condoleeza Rice because she is a republican?

And while you are at it, answer the question of how a person who can dismiss an elective war which violated international conventions, simply because the majority of the victims were nonblack, can ever open their mouth to label someone else as a black idealogue? 20

We won't even bother with the fact that there are indeed black iraqi's....

Roll Eyes

Considering you listed her with other Black repubs I think it rather obvious you are biased. Of course you never pointed out anything anti-Black she has done.
I think it clear I meant political ideologue since I was talking dems and repubs. So yes indeed I find black ideolouge amusing. Tailing behind liberals makes you no more black than tailing behind conservatives. You are closer to indicting yourself for calling a black irrelevent because they follow a different group of whites than you.
Anyway, I like your snarkiness and I find it somewhat amusing but that won't hide your lack of substance. What does her support for the war on Iraq has to do with her relevance to the Black community?



What does this ad hominem have to do with Condoleeza Rice? Do you have any substance to offer regarding the relevance of the war criminal Condoleeza Rice to the black community?
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

Respectfully, hasn't she reached a significantly higher career plateau than just about any other educated African-American? Isn't that the whole point here? She was, by most international accounts, the most powerful woman in the world, and the most powerful black person in the world.

The relevance of her pre-Bush credentials and success level to this discussion, as I see it, is on the question of whether her life's story -- politics aside -- can serve as a roadmap for younger generations. Her education and career advancements are central to that discussion.



alright, back to this. *Respectfully* the point (for me) is that I do not find a valid reason to consider Condi Rice outside of politics or politics aside since that is the context within which Condoleeza Rice was placed into power and received national prominence.

I suppose the inclination to divorce a significant political figure from the political context might seem logical to some, but, I find it a curious position.

Applying this logic, politics aside, the Janjuwit, probably seem like wonderful family men, outside the political context of killing africans in darfur ohsnap
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
I am aware that she has a Ph.d and has served as a Provost, as well as having been groomed by the bush family, serving on their board of directors and having an oil tanker named after her. She was hand-picked by Daddy Bush to bring Dumbya up to speed on Russian relations/foreign policy yet, she didn't frequently travel to russia and relations with russia deteriorated during her tenure...

Does she have some "credentials" that i'm unaware of


Yes. She graduated from one of the top universities in the world and long before "daddy Bush" handpicked her for his son, she was a foreign policy expert for Ronald Reagan's 1st administration.

She was one of the youngest professors to gain tenure at Stanford and managed the assets of that university (without major critique) for years.

Those are her credentials. They have nothing to do with her ideology.


Black ideologues crack me up.


which one of us are you attempting to characterize as a "black idealogue" and what does WAR CRIMINAL have to do with black ideology?


You don't like her because she is an republican, you likely would if she was Dem. She supported a war against non blacks, that has no absolutely no reflection on her blackness. plenty black supported the war.



What evidence do you have to support your premise that i "don't like" Condoleeza Rice because she is a republican?

And while you are at it, answer the question of how a person who can dismiss an elective war which violated international conventions, simply because the majority of the victims were nonblack, can ever open their mouth to label someone else as a black idealogue? 20

We won't even bother with the fact that there are indeed black iraqi's....

Roll Eyes

Considering you listed her with other Black repubs I think it rather obvious you are biased. Of course you never pointed out anything anti-Black she has done.
I think it clear I meant political ideologue since I was talking dems and repubs. So yes indeed I find black ideolouge amusing. Tailing behind liberals makes you no more black than tailing behind conservatives. You are closer to indicting yourself for calling a black irrelevent because they follow a different group of whites than you.
Anyway, I like your snarkiness and I find it somewhat amusing but that won't hide your lack of substance. What does her support for the war on Iraq has to do with her relevance to the Black community?



What does this ad hominem have to do with Condoleeza Rice? Do you have any substance to offer regarding the relevance of the war criminal Condoleeza Rice to the black community?


Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?


Ummm... she's black and isn't this dialogue about assessing how she will be viewed historically...??? (Her place in black history)and whether or not her accomplishments prior to her appointment in the Bush administration overshadows and primarily colors her place in history over her actions after her appointment...
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
I am aware that she has a Ph.d and has served as a Provost, as well as having been groomed by the bush family, serving on their board of directors and having an oil tanker named after her. She was hand-picked by Daddy Bush to bring Dumbya up to speed on Russian relations/foreign policy yet, she didn't frequently travel to russia and relations with russia deteriorated during her tenure...

Does she have some "credentials" that i'm unaware of


Yes. She graduated from one of the top universities in the world and long before "daddy Bush" handpicked her for his son, she was a foreign policy expert for Ronald Reagan's 1st administration.

She was one of the youngest professors to gain tenure at Stanford and managed the assets of that university (without major critique) for years.

Those are her credentials. They have nothing to do with her ideology.


Black ideologues crack me up.


which one of us are you attempting to characterize as a "black idealogue" and what does WAR CRIMINAL have to do with black ideology?


You don't like her because she is an republican, you likely would if she was Dem. She supported a war against non blacks, that has no absolutely no reflection on her blackness. plenty black supported the war.



What evidence do you have to support your premise that i "don't like" Condoleeza Rice because she is a republican?

And while you are at it, answer the question of how a person who can dismiss an elective war which violated international conventions, simply because the majority of the victims were nonblack, can ever open their mouth to label someone else as a black idealogue? 20

We won't even bother with the fact that there are indeed black iraqi's....

Roll Eyes

Considering you listed her with other Black repubs I think it rather obvious you are biased. Of course you never pointed out anything anti-Black she has done.
I think it clear I meant political ideologue since I was talking dems and repubs. So yes indeed I find black ideolouge amusing. Tailing behind liberals makes you no more black than tailing behind conservatives. You are closer to indicting yourself for calling a black irrelevent because they follow a different group of whites than you.
Anyway, I like your snarkiness and I find it somewhat amusing but that won't hide your lack of substance. What does her support for the war on Iraq has to do with her relevance to the Black community?



What does this ad hominem have to do with Condoleeza Rice? Do you have any substance to offer regarding the relevance of the war criminal Condoleeza Rice to the black community?


Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?


Black American Soldiers lost their lives on a trumped up pretense which was heartily defended by Condoleeza Rice on many occasions, and Black Iraqi citizens were undoubtedly among the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's killed an maimed by the shock and awe of the USA pre-emptive strike.
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?


Ummm... she's black and isn't this dialogue about assessing how she will be viewed historically...??? (Her place in black history)and whether or not her accomplishments prior to her appointment in the Bush administration overshadows and primarily colors her place in history over her actions after her appointment...


The Iraq war isn't part of Black history. She does have a place in Black history though and it involves a Black church in Mississippi. A child of one of the most repressive government who rose and defeated the obstacles put place in front of her by the most aggressively racist whites in the nation. Her place among real Blacks is solid. I find any Black who has issues with her because she is a republican or supported the Iraq war funny and a borderline fool- and without a doubt a sycophant for white liberals.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
I am aware that she has a Ph.d and has served as a Provost, as well as having been groomed by the bush family, serving on their board of directors and having an oil tanker named after her. She was hand-picked by Daddy Bush to bring Dumbya up to speed on Russian relations/foreign policy yet, she didn't frequently travel to russia and relations with russia deteriorated during her tenure...

Does she have some "credentials" that i'm unaware of


Yes. She graduated from one of the top universities in the world and long before "daddy Bush" handpicked her for his son, she was a foreign policy expert for Ronald Reagan's 1st administration.

She was one of the youngest professors to gain tenure at Stanford and managed the assets of that university (without major critique) for years.

Those are her credentials. They have nothing to do with her ideology.


Black ideologues crack me up.


which one of us are you attempting to characterize as a "black idealogue" and what does WAR CRIMINAL have to do with black ideology?


You don't like her because she is an republican, you likely would if she was Dem. She supported a war against non blacks, that has no absolutely no reflection on her blackness. plenty black supported the war.



What evidence do you have to support your premise that i "don't like" Condoleeza Rice because she is a republican?

And while you are at it, answer the question of how a person who can dismiss an elective war which violated international conventions, simply because the majority of the victims were nonblack, can ever open their mouth to label someone else as a black idealogue? 20

We won't even bother with the fact that there are indeed black iraqi's....

Roll Eyes

Considering you listed her with other Black repubs I think it rather obvious you are biased. Of course you never pointed out anything anti-Black she has done.
I think it clear I meant political ideologue since I was talking dems and repubs. So yes indeed I find black ideolouge amusing. Tailing behind liberals makes you no more black than tailing behind conservatives. You are closer to indicting yourself for calling a black irrelevent because they follow a different group of whites than you.
Anyway, I like your snarkiness and I find it somewhat amusing but that won't hide your lack of substance. What does her support for the war on Iraq has to do with her relevance to the Black community?



What does this ad hominem have to do with Condoleeza Rice? Do you have any substance to offer regarding the relevance of the war criminal Condoleeza Rice to the black community?


Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?


Black American Soldiers lost their lives on a trumped up pretense which was heartily defended by Condoleeza Rice on many occasions, and Black Iraqi citizens were undoubtedly among the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's killed an maimed by the shock and awe of the USA pre-emptive strike.


Reach, much? The fact of that matter is she is a successful Black women who will serve as a role model to many intelligent Black women and men. The Iraq war is irrelevant.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
Nor do I care to know you. Nope, that would make you relevant... Roll Eyes

I understand clearly that some africanamericans are willing to excuse war crimes if the perpetrator is highly educated.
It's pretty unfortunate that you leap to this kind of conclusion from anything I've posted.

Anyway... What do you think of DDouble's comment? I thought it was spot on, but no one has commented on it.
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?


Ummm... she's black and isn't this dialogue about assessing how she will be viewed historically...??? (Her place in black history)and whether or not her accomplishments prior to her appointment in the Bush administration overshadows and primarily colors her place in history over her actions after her appointment...


The Iraq war isn't part of Black history. She does have a place in Black history though and it involves a Black church in Mississippi. A child of one of the most repressive government who rose and defeated the obstacles put place in front of her by the most aggressively racist whites in the nation. Her place among real Blacks is solid. I find any Black who has issues with her because she is a republican or supported the Iraq war funny and a borderline fool- and without a doubt a sycophant for white liberals.


Ah I see.. what percentage of blacks need to be part of something for it to be considered by you as part of our history?

Also how are you defining real blacks?
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
What do you think of DDouble's comment? I thought it was spot on, but no one has commented on it.


quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
Dr. Rice is very relevant as a role model as well as a cautionary tale for African-Americans.

Children (and some adults) can emulate her drive, focus and accomplishments. Adults can ponder the complexities of life that lead an African-American woman to Dr. Rice's current political bent.


I agree with it.. but think it should not just stop at what she's done before she came into office... I don't know why there is an inability to talk about, weigh and analyze those things either.. shouldn't her complete history be weighed? If so, then she will become relevant as a role model or as a warning of what not to do with one's accomplishments..
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
Nor do I care to know you. Nope, that would make you relevant... Roll Eyes

I understand clearly that some africanamericans are willing to excuse war crimes if the perpetrator is highly educated.
It's pretty unfortunate that you leap to this kind of conclusion from anything I've posted.

Anyway... What do you think of DDouble's comment? I thought it was spot on, but no one has commented on it.



I find it unfortunate that you would interpret my "what credentials?" rhetorical question literally, after, I had posted my awareness of her education and a wiki blurb regarding the same. I find it further strange that the backhanded snipe of "leaping to conclusions" has entered your post. If you and "other posters" continue to assert that politics don't matter, and "politics aside", then it is in NO WAY "leaping to conclusions" to state what appears to be your position: Condi Rice is relevant to black americans because she is impressively "credentialed" despite her deep associations with the worst of the Bush administrations actions. That is no leap. That is the position you have taken.

regarding Ddouble's post, it seems somewhat similar to the first post on this thread where i stated "she is relevant, as a reminder of what not to aspire to". Educational attainment aside, I disagree that she is a relevant role model for black children given the impact of her politics.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

Again what does the Iraq war have to do with her being relevent to Blacks?


Ummm... she's black and isn't this dialogue about assessing how she will be viewed historically...??? (Her place in black history)and whether or not her accomplishments prior to her appointment in the Bush administration overshadows and primarily colors her place in history over her actions after her appointment...


The Iraq war isn't part of Black history. She does have a place in Black history though and it involves a Black church in Mississippi. A child of one of the most repressive government who rose and defeated the obstacles put place in front of her by the most aggressively racist whites in the nation. Her place among real Blacks is solid. I find any Black who has issues with her because she is a republican or supported the Iraq war funny and a borderline fool- and without a doubt a sycophant for white liberals.


Ah I see.. what percentage of blacks need to be part of something for it to be considered by you as part of our history?

Also how are you defining real blacks?


In order for something to be apart of Black History it has to have involve largely Blacks or must be intrinsic to our story as a people. T The Iraq war 100 years from now will be taught as American history and most certainly not Black history.

Real Blacks are people who not only racially Black but culturally and consciously and by experience and identity.
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
From Afro Saxon:
Black ideologues crack me up.
which one of us are you attempting to characterize as a "black idealogue" and what does WAR CRIMINAL have to do with black ideology?


NS, nobody here is arguing that her politics are in black people's best interests. I think the point of the question is whether, in spite of her work with Bush, her story can/should resonate with black people, because of her attainments and the opportunities she had because of them.

The question "what credentials" is ridiculous. That would be like someone else asking, "What relationship with Bush."

The discussion, at its most intellectually honest, would involve people taking it as a GIVEN that she 1) is a right winger who is dissociated from the AA community, and was involved very deeply in the Bush administration's worst activities; and 2) has a compelling story of growth, academic and career achievement, and rise to prominence and power, regardless of the politics. To disparage the very existence of either of these two truths about Condi is disingenuous. It seems to me that there are arguments to be made one way or another, even when being intellectually honest about it.


Vox, while you are over in that other post waxing poetic about the atrocious behavior of other posters, would you be a dear, and clarify just exactly who you are attempting to characterize as disingenuous and intellectually dishonest in this post?
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

In order for something to be apart of Black History it has to have involve largely Blacks or must be intrinsic to our story as a people. T The Iraq war 100 years from now will be taught as American history and most certainly not Black history.

Real Blacks are people who not only racially Black but culturally and consciously and by experience and identity.


Tell that to all those black people who have died other there. No matter how you try american history IS black history. You can't seperate the two.
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

In order for something to be apart of Black History it has to have involve largely Blacks or must be intrinsic to our story as a people. T The Iraq war 100 years from now will be taught as American history and most certainly not Black history.

Real Blacks are people who not only racially Black but culturally and consciously and by experience and identity.


Tell that to all those black people who have died other there. No matter how you try american history IS black history. You can't seperate the two.


To who? People who signed up for the military? It is firmly American history, you may want to included everything from Pearl Harbor to 9/11 into Black history but I don't think it is a reasonable opinion.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

NS, nobody here is arguing that her politics are in black people's best interests. I think the point of the question is whether, in spite of her work with Bush, her story can/should resonate with black people, because of her attainments and the opportunities she had because of them.

The question "what credentials" is ridiculous. That would be like someone else asking, "What relationship with Bush."

The discussion, at its most intellectually honest, would involve people taking it as a GIVEN that she 1) is a right winger who is dissociated from the AA community, and was involved very deeply in the Bush administration's worst activities; and 2) has a compelling story of growth, academic and career achievement, and rise to prominence and power, regardless of the politics. To disparage the very existence of either of these two truths about Condi is disingenuous. It seems to me that there are arguments to be made one way or another, even when being intellectually honest about it.


Vox, while you are over in that other post waxing poetic about the atrocious behavior of other posters, would you be a dear, and clarify just exactly who you are attempting to characterize as disingenuous and intellectually dishonest in this post?
The discussion in the other thread, from my perspective, is about patterns and ongoing habits of disruption. Nobody should expect perfection here, and I think it's extraordinary if people feel otherwise. Confused

What I referred to as intellectually dishonest was your question, "what credentials." As you've since clarified what you meant by that ("clarified" being a word which you seem to infer haughtiness in, for some reason Confused ), I'm happy to rescind the implication, because I misunderstood.

I wasn't the only one who misunderstood; your entire post consisted of just that question. But since you cleared up that you didn't mean it as I saw it, that's that. What's the problem?
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

What I referred to as intellectually dishonest was your question, "what credentials." As you've since clarified what you meant by that ("clarified" being a word which you seem to infer haughtiness in, for some reason Confused ), I'm happy to rescind the implication, because I misunderstood.



It was totally inappropriate of you to have made the "implication" in the first place. These are not words that you should be slinging around with such apparent ease in a BLACK. INTELLIGENT. COMMUNITY. Who the hell are you? You definitely need to check your patterns and ongoing habits of making needlessly snide comments.

PRIOR to your "clarifying" things that needed no clarification, I had already made further posts elaborating on my position. All you had to do was read further. Then you have the nerve to whine about having someone ascribing something to you after you have hurled "disingenous" and "intellectually dishonest" into the conversation?

RHETORICAL QUESTION ALERT: Or have "disingenuous" and "intellectually dishonest" suddenly become complimentary terms? td6
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:

I find it unfortunate that you would interpret my "what credentials?" rhetorical question literally, after, I had posted my awareness of her education and a wiki blurb regarding the same.



No. You posted the "what credentials?" question BEFORE you posted the wiki bio. And it was presented as an non-qualified (this isn't a diss, btw) literal question. Which is why I responded to you with incredulity.

Further, when you did post the wiki bio, you didn't post it to make conciliatory concessions about her academic background. You did it to prove to me that her universities weren't world renowned. You attempted to devalue her.

You ARE being disingenous.
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
Anyway... What do you think of DDouble's comment? I thought it was spot on, but no one has commented on it.


It was well stated. And Ddouble's second point about a "cautionary tale" of how a black woman growing up in the thick of the Alabama civil rights movement came to a republican worldview and turned her back on social justice... is worth telling.

I'd read her book. I'd like to know what she thinks (what she *really* thinks apart from her party-line with the Bush Admin) and how she got there.
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:

In order for something to be apart of Black History it has to have involve largely Blacks or must be intrinsic to our story as a people. T The Iraq war 100 years from now will be taught as American history and most certainly not Black history.

Real Blacks are people who not only racially Black but culturally and consciously and by experience and identity.


Tell that to all those black people who have died other there. No matter how you try american history IS black history. You can't seperate the two.


To who? People who signed up for the military? It is firmly American history, you may want to included everything from Pearl Harbor to 9/11 into Black history but I don't think it is a reasonable opinion.


I don't think that it is a reasonable opinion to state that wars and similar earth changing events can be seperated from black history. How many millions of black people live in america?? How were their lives permanently change by Pearl Harbor and 9/11??
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:

I find it unfortunate that you would interpret my "what credentials?" rhetorical question literally, after, I had posted my awareness of her education and a wiki blurb regarding the same.



No. You posted the "what credentials?" question BEFORE you posted the wiki bio. And it was presented as an non-qualified (this isn't a diss, btw) literal question. Which is why I responded to you with incredulity.

Further, when you did post the wiki bio, you didn't post it to make conciliatory concessions about her academic background. You did it to prove to me that her universities weren't world renowned. You attempted to devalue her.

You ARE being disingenous.



No. You are being a provacateur and attempting to remain in Vox's good graces while flirting both him and Honestbrother up all over the board.

Dr. Dr. Shulamite, could you please elaborate on your scientific-like methods utilized to distinguish between a rhetorical question and a literal one since you seem to know what was in the minds of posters...more than the poster does? Roll Eyes

What should be clear (especially after i have elaborated on more than one occasion) is that my rhetorical question "what credentials?" is in response to AFRO SAXON's earlier response to me regarding her credentials speaking for themselves, to the point that in his opinion condi's actions leading up to the war had nothing to do with her "value as a negro"...


Not only that: but in response to your feigned shocked question of "you must be kidding right?" I elaborate on my awareness of her education and early career as a provost AND GO ON TO ADD:

quote:
"Does she have some "credentials" that i'm unaware of that would excuse her actions and remove her from being categorized with Clarence Thomas, Alan Keyes, and Colin Powell?


So prior to your melodrama, you already knew, that i was questioning how her credentials could excuse her actions...

Oh my...Shula...you were being disingenuous! Say it ain't so! But for whose benefit i wonder? 19

So for the slow kids, my question was AGAIN a rhetorical question in response to AfroSaxon and meant to highlight my curiosity about what credentials could possibly speak for themselves to the point of absolving Condi Rice of any complicity in leading the country to war on false pretenses...

Further, I don't need to "devalue" Condi. She's done a pretty good job of it all by herself.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:

quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
From Wikipedia:

"Rice graduated from St. Mary's Academy in 1970. In 1974, at age 19, Rice earned her BA in political science, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver. In 1975, she obtained her Master's Degree in political science from the University of Notre Dame. She first worked in the State Department in 1977, during the Carter administration, as an intern in the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. In 1981, at the age of 26, she received her PhD in Political Science from the Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver. Her dissertation along with some of her earliest publications, centered on military policy and politics in Czechoslovakia."


Top Universities in the world? Notre Dame? or University of Denver? Cool


I'm sorry. I thought she graduated from Stanford in addition to being faculty there. My mistake. But both Denver and ND have admirable poly sci deparments.

Notwithstanding, if this is the only retort that you can offer re her "credentials", you are a very limited individual.

When you, negrospiritual, come back to the board having...

1. graduated Phi Beta Kappa from your college as a teenager

2. Got your MS AND your (separate) PhD in 6 years, all done by age 26.

3. Land as faculty at STANFORD and make tenure (I think) before you're 30.

4. End up Provost of a multi-million dollar institution for years managing funds for the top ranking schools in this university in the world

5. Serve as an Executive Service federal employee WHILE doing the above for three separate presidential administrations.


...then you come back to the board to talk about somebody's "credentials".



Since you seem willing to get personal and go postal over Condi Rice without having any FACTS or any clue about my possible "credentials", I may as well go ahead and issue this...

DRAMA QUEEN ALERT: Perhaps i am a "very limited individual", but at least I'm not psychotic 20
Speaking of "patterns & ongoing habits," it's not every day that somebody can disagree with you on this board without it devolving into this kind of bs. Why is that?

quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

What I referred to as intellectually dishonest was your question, "what credentials." As you've since clarified what you meant by that ("clarified" being a word which you seem to infer haughtiness in, for some reason Confused ), I'm happy to rescind the implication, because I misunderstood.



It was totally inappropriate of you to have made the "implication" in the first place.
No, it wasn't. I wasn't even the only one who drew that conclusion. And actually, you know what, I take it back; I was ready to bury it after the last post, but now, as I re-read the thread, I take it back-- you're totally being intellectually dishonest.

  • YOU asked the question, "What credentials." That question represented your WHOLE post. After someone responded, you then ridiculed the school Rice got her PhD from. If your point in asking the question was that NO credentials are strong enough to "excuse her war crimes," then you wouldn't have ridiculed the U of Denver. Otherwise, you would be tacitly promoting the notion that, had her PhD come from Harvard, her actions could be excused. Obviously, you're not saying that, so SOMETHING is not adding up in all of this indignation you're trying to claim.

  • Furthermore, nobody ever suggested the point you appeared to run away with, which was that Rice's education somehow excuses the foulness of her Bush-era work. This was strictly a topic concerning her "relevance" -- however we view that -- to the black community. Therefore, in my view you were asking "what credentials make her relevant." Since you later tried to minimize the school she got her PhD from, the clear and logical conclusion to draw is that you don't believe that her credentials were strong enough to make her relevant to the black community. If you did mean "What credentials make it okay for her to suck up to Bush and promote the Iraq War," then you were indeed being disingenuous and intellectually dishonest--- Even if your question was rhetorical. That's because, with this question, you were dishonestly reframing the issue away from "is she relevant" to the false, strawman idea that "does her education excuse the shit she did."

You are asking me to "read ahead" to see that you knew her credentials were solid. But you need to ask yourself to stop MISreading the contentions of others.

quote:
it is in NO WAY "leaping to conclusions" to state what appears to be your position: Condi Rice is relevant to black americans because she is impressively "credentialed" despite her deep associations with the worst of the Bush administrations actions. That is no leap. That is the position you have taken.
Nope. Now that DDouble has broken it down, I cosign THAT position. Prior to that, I was engaged in a discussion around an idea, not a debate on a position. The closest I came to a position was that the issue deserves a look because she is a black woman who built a life of unprecedented power, but that her disconnection to black people and our interests needs to be corrected on HER end, not ours, if at all. And face it, I never even THOUGHT about taking the position as you're framing it.

And you have the nerve to be incredulous about being called intellectually dishonest. Roll Eyes

GTF outta here.
quote:
Originally posted by shulamite:
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
You got emotional problems, don't you?


No, I don't have emotional problems. But you obviously have not set foot in an environment requiring the kind of self-discipline, ambition, and sheer brains that it takes for her (or any black person like her) to succeed. That's obvious. Because if you had done it, the phrase "what credentials" could have never left your mouth.

quote:
Here, imo, her stellar personal academic/political accomplishments pale in comparison to supporting, lying and misleading an entire country into war and further financial hardship


In contrast, negrospiritual, I can get with the above quote because at least there is a recognition of *stellar* in her academic biography. And for the record - I actually AGREE with the above sentiment, but I'll never go around saying that the woman didn't HAVE the credentials to do her job.

It's ludicrous to be that blinded by ideology.



quote:
I'll never go around saying that the woman didn't HAVE the credentials to do her job.



Interestingly, no one here in this thread said Condi didn't have the credentials to "do her job". This was not a discussion of the job requirements for National Security Advisor, and Secretary of State and whether Condi Rice met those criteria...


This means you purposely chose to lapse into histrionics just on GP... Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:

  • YOU asked the question, "What credentials." That question represented your WHOLE post. After someone responded, you then ridiculed the school Rice got her PhD from. If your point in asking the question was that NO credentials are strong enough to "excuse her war crimes," then you wouldn't have ridiculed the U of Denver.



  • VOX, you are LYING. I did not "ridicule the U of Denver" and you cannot copy and paste any negative words which I said about University of Denver because what you have asserted is nothing more than a LIE.

    I posted that wiki blurb in response to Shula because I knew Condi did not get her PH.D from an ivy league institution which is what i assume people mean when they say one of the "top universities in the world" although i do not personally give a flip about the ivy-leagueness of an individual's education.


    VOX, QUIT LYING and GO SIT DOWN SOMEWHERE Roll Eyes
    quote:
    Originally posted by Vox:

    Speaking of "patterns & ongoing habits," it's not every day that somebody can disagree with you on this board without it devolving into this kind of bs. Why is that?



    You are right. It's NOT everyday. It's only when smug self righteous individuals jump to faulty conclusions based on hasty reading. But this is pretty funny coming from a person with multiple NOVELLA length dissertations about Romulus Burnett?

    Now would seem to be the appropriate time to mention the number of times you've thought nothing of negatively labeling posters (i.e. Fabulous and Koco) and it had to be brought to your attention that you shouldn't have done so?

    Here's a clue: presenting information in a borg like manner does not mean it is objective and unbiased. You need to check that for real, because you seem to think your subjective and biased utterances are free from such human tendencies...

    GTFOH
    HILARIOUS. Why is it that whenever someone gets smashed in their attempt to argue around their own flawed point, they call the person "arrogant" who smashed them? lol

    quote:
    Originally posted by negrospiritual:
    I did not "ridicule the U of Denver" and you cannot copy and paste any negative words which I said about University of Denver because what you have asserted is nothing more than a LIE.

    I posted that wiki blurb in response to Shula because I knew Condi did not get her PH.D from an ivy league institution which is what i assume people mean when they say one of the "top universities in the world" although i do not personally give a flip about the ivy-leagueness of an individual's education.
    I don't know anything about U of Denver to know where it ranks in Condi's field of study. But there is no way you can claim in any sense that "Top Universities in the world? Notre Dame? or University of Denver? Cool " was not a sideways diss of those schools. The diss may even be justified as far as I know; I don't know what Shulamite knows or doesn't know about the programs at those schools. She could have totally been wrong on that point, but it doesn't matter here.

    The ONLY reason it's relevant here is because the fact that u did that shows that in SOME way, the level of the school mattered in your analysis. Period. Point blank. You can't deny that.

    And since it mattered to what you were saying, SOMETHING in what you're claiming is not adding up. The only explanation possible is that you were being intellectually dishonest on some level. And that, of course, gives lie to this phony shock and horror you're claiming at the term (which wasn't even leveled at you originally, but at behavior which you had temporarily convinced me you had not done; so for a minute there it didn't apply to you for you to be upset about).

    That, and the fact that on the same thread you called someone else "psychotic" for no reason. lol

    Physician, heal THYself.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Vox:
    Why is it that whenever someone gets smashed in their attempt to argue around their own flawed point, they call the person "arrogant" who smashed them?


    Because a person who has no substance to his or her point and then is insecure about that lack of substance finds it easier to resort to ad hominem attacks than admit that he or she truly has no substance.

    It's much easier, and she gets away with it solely because she's on a lay-message board...

    Here's a clue, negrospiritual: The next time you decide to clown an academic of whom you have NO understanding, make sure you don't attempt to do so in front of academics who've been where she's been and actually comprehend logic.

    Add Reply

    Post
    ×
    ×
    ×
    ×
    Link copied to your clipboard.
    ×