Rice: Huckabee’s Foreign Policy Criticisms Are ‘Simply Ludicrous’
Rice: Huckabee’s Foreign Policy Criticisms Are ‘Simply Ludicrous’
President Bush’s foreign policy has recently come under fire from several conservatives. In a current Foreign Affairs article, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee writes that the administration suffers from an “arrogant bunker mentality.” Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton wants the United States to be more arrogant, saying that Bush’s policies are in “free fall” because he is “under the influence of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.”
Today in a press briefing, a reporter asked Rice to respond to their criticisms. Rice initially refused, dismissing them as unimportant. But she nevertheless proceeded into a vigorous defense of the administration’s policies, eventually calling the statements “ludicrous”:
RICE: Look, I don’t comment on other people’s comments. I don’t have time, all right. I really don’t have time to worry about this. [...]
The idea that somehow this is a go-it-alone policy is just simply ludicrous. And one would only have to be not observing the facts, let me say that, to say that this is now a go-it-alone foreign policy. [...]
And so, I would just say to people, look at the facts.
Watch it:
As ThinkProgress highlighted yesterday, a “look at the facts” of the Bush administration’s inclusive foreign policy:
Transcript:
QUESTION: Madam Secretary, Mike Huckabee recently said that this administration has a go-it-alone foreign policy, that it has a arrogant, bunker mentality that’s hurt America around the world.
And we also recently heard from John Bolton, who said that the Bush administration’s foreign policy is in a free fall, and it’s because the president has been listening to you too much.
RICE: Gee.
QUESTION: So I would just like to give you opportunity: What do you make of this?
RICE: Look, I don’t comment on other people’s comments. I don’t have time, all right. I really don’t have time to worry about this.
Let me just tell you what I think of where we stand in America’s policy.
RICE: We have right now probably the strongest trans-Atlantic relations, interactions that we’ve had certainly during this administration, and I would say in a very long time.
If you look at the relationship with France, which is being put to good use in Lebanon, the kind of interaction the president had with President Sarkozy when he came here; if you loom at the relationship between Angela Merkel’s government — and it’s not just the chancellor. It is the relationship I have with Frank-Walter Steinmeyer the relationship that I have with Bernard Kouchner. You know, the British, it’s always been a solid relationship.
We go to NATO, we solve problems together, we’ve got NATO fighting in Afghanistan.
The idea that somehow this is a go-it-alone policy is just simply ludicrous. And one would only have to be not observing the facts, let me say that, to say that this is now a go-it-alone foreign policy. [...]
And so, I would just say to people, look at the facts.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
disagree with two idiots that know as much as you do about foreign policy?
December 21st, 2007 at 12:41 pmthis is a cartoon plot, right? got it, three stooges redux
The blind criticizing the blind. A foreign affairs Dingbat off. They all get the gong.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:48 pmShut up, lady.
Smoking gun… right.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:53 pm“look at the facts”????
Holy Delusional, Batman!
December 21st, 2007 at 12:55 pmRICE: We have right now probably the strongest trans-Atlantic relations, interactions that we’ve had certainly during this administration, and I would say in a very long time.
Someone might want to remind the Secretary of State that there are in fact two oceans bordering the United States. Three, if you count Alaska.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:57 pmYou would think it would be obvious to everyone, including Ms. Oil Tanker Condi herself, that we have sukked big time since the stolen election of 2000.
∞
December 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pmSo I guess “You’re either with us or you’re with them” doesn’t show a go-it-alone foreign policy right?
December 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pmno, your foreign policy is ludicrous, but so is huckabee.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:59 pmForget Huckabee. With Fred in office, we’ll show those countries.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:01 pmThompson and Romney, a great team they’d make.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:02 pmHuckabee is too liberal for my tastes.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:02 pmLooks like the neocons are kicking Rice to the curb via Huckabee.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:02 pmAnd Romney & Giuliani would simply be “bush Lite” – totally isolationist and ripe for the pickin’ by any country who wants us.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmre 10,
yeah, Romney can tie thompson to the roof, ala granny from the Beverly Hillbillies…
December 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pmI like today’s edition of “Backbiting Righty Cannibals” – I think it’ll get an Emmy.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pmForget Huckabee. With Fred in office, we’ll show those countries.
Comment by tombaked — December 21, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
twicebaked,
brilliant.
yeah, that’s the approach we need to take. it worked so well for this administration.
don’t you have anything better to do during your x-mas break?
December 21st, 2007 at 1:07 pmComment by Bobwurst — December 21, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
Thompson is the classic conservative, the shape-up this country needs. A return to jolly warm christmas seasons like 50s, I’d be able to enjoy. And the economic growth would be marvelous.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:08 pmForget Huckabee. With Fred in office, we’ll show those countries.
Comment by tombaked — December 21, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
Show them what? Law & Order reruns?
December 21st, 2007 at 1:08 pmComment by LividLib — December 21, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
I was listening to Sean Hannity on Wednesday and he says he’ll be ready to fight, energized and ready, and that 2008 will be a good year.
He’s a warrior.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:10 pmdont let “real” facts get in your way condi.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:11 pmComment by toasterhead — December 21, 2007 @ 1:08 pm
If Fred is as good with the presidency as he is on TV, this country will prosper and our stdard of livning will increase.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:11 pmWow, can you imagine what kind a vacuous, shallow and side life you have if you are quoting Sean Hannity and his commitment to ‘fight’?
As pathetic as those who listen to the drugged out, obese and thrice divorced and childless defender of family values Rush Limpcock.
-GSD
December 21st, 2007 at 1:13 pmSad life…not side life….
-GSD
December 21st, 2007 at 1:13 pmSeems Huckabible found some absurd religious competitor here.Ugh, such a horror circus!
December 21st, 2007 at 1:13 pmMan, Bolton, Rice and Huckabee all bagging on each other…is this thread an early Christmas present from TP to itself? ;)
December 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pmAh, the war criminal Cunning Rice “doesn’t have time” to comment about the fact that in a current Foreign Affairs article, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee writes that the administration suffers from an “arrogant bunker mentality?” Charmed I’m sure…
Ms. Rice just showed again her very own version of the “arrogant bunker mentality” exhibited so frequently by other members of the Bush crime family. She’s a bunker-baby…
December 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pmIf Fred is as good with the presidency as he is on TV, this country will prosper and our stdard of livning will increase.
Comment by tombaked — December 21, 2007 @ 1:11
OFF TOPIC, again. Not to mention namejacking tombaker. Report this loon.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:15 pmSean Hannity is the definition of a real patriot who works for his pay.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:16 pmEVERYONE please report as abuse tombaked for spamming the threads and being off topic, we need to get this idiot kicked.
Buck Fush
December 21st, 2007 at 1:16 pmComment by Shayne — December 21, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
Namejacking.
o…k.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:16 pmMan, Bolton, Rice and Huckabee all bagging on each other…is this thread an early Christmas present from TP to itself? ;)
Comment by Keltoi — December 21, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
No it’s the gift you Republican have given TP. We hadn’t looked at it that way so thanks for pointing it out.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:18 pmHe’s a warrior.
Comment by tombaked — December 21, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
And what a warrior he is! Just look at his distinguished military/intelligence record:
Last Best Chance (2005) (V) …. President Charles Ross
December 21st, 2007 at 1:18 pmBaby’s Day Out (1994) …. FBI Agent Dale Grissom
Flight of the Intruder (1991) (uncredited) …. Court-Martial Captain
Fat Man and Little Boy (1989) …. Maj. Gen. Melrose Hayden Barry
“China Beach” …. Lt. Col. Reinhardt (1 episode, 1989)
No Way Out (1987) …. CIA Director Marshall
A poll is neither a fact, nor a reason to change sound policy.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:18 pm“Simply ludicrous” Condi is you starting to worry about your legacy NOW. A little late for that.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pmA poll is neither a fact, nor a reason to change sound policy.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 21, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
Certainly true, if only it was “sound policy.” Since it’s been disfunctional, poorly-scoped policy, not so much.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pmComment by toasterhead — December 21, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
Right toasterhead, a B actor with not one leading role in his credits. Even the show he’s in now is a recurring role and not a series regular. He’s a loser even as an actor.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:21 pmA poll is neither a fact, nor a reason to change sound policy.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 21, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
You found a “sound policy”? Do tell us what it is.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:22 pmJason,
Unless that poll is in-line with your agenda.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:22 pmA poll is neither a fact, nor a reason to change sound policy.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 21, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
Actually, poll statistics are facts, by definition. If 52% of people surveyed express negative views of a policy, then it is a fact that 52% of people surveyed expressed negative views of that policy.
And you’re right – it’s not a reason to change sound policy. It is, on the other hand, a reason to reexamine an obviously failed policy.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:22 pmWhy is Condi getting a presidential candidate confused with a rapper?
December 21st, 2007 at 1:24 pmFred Thompson would break the spoiled grip of the media from liberal hands.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:24 pmI really don’t have time to worry about this. […]
She’s late for her shoe private shopping appointment…
December 21st, 2007 at 1:25 pmthe soiled grip of the media from Fox hands.
Fixed up that one for ya.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:25 pmBig news on St. Darylls trip to Argentina,
December 21st, 2007 at 1:27 pm#39, toaster,
Statistics about opinions do not make those opinions a fact, even if 100% agree.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:28 pmhttp://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2007/12/21/missionary-attacked/#comment-30523
December 21st, 2007 at 1:28 pmStatistics about opinions do not make those opinions a fact, even if 100% agree.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 21, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
Which is why they’re called opinion polls, not fact polls. And although individual polls can sometimes suffer from flawed methodology, they can – when administered correctly – serve as a barometer of public opinion on a policy. And in case this wasn’t covered in your home-school civics class, the consent of the governed – aka positive public opinion – is vital to the functioning of a democracy.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:33 pmWhy does the press report on these idiots with absolutely zero credibility, yet they ignore Wexler and the House Judiciary Committee when they lay out grounds for impeachment of the Vice President?
WexlerWantsHearings.com
December 21st, 2007 at 1:34 pmHow would SHE know? She’s still fighting the cold war.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:36 pmJason, a poll is a statistical representation of opinions. Again, I will point out to you that in a democratic representative republic, our representatives are supposed to represent our desires. It is profoundly undemocratic to disregard the desires of the people.
But, really, this is just about a circle-jerk. A sociopathic corporatist is arguing with a psychotic religious fanatic. Who cares? We need to get rid of both of them.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:37 pmRICE IS A WAR CRIMINAL AND SHOULD BE FACING A FIRING SQUAD FOR WAR CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:40 pmShe sure has that George Bush smirk down pat, doesn’t she?
December 21st, 2007 at 1:46 pm41 – He surely would, if only he could break his own grip on the prune juice jug long enough to do so.
Thanks for stalking me just the same, though. It’s a delightful (secular)holiday treat. Maybe there is a Santa, after all.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:02 pmDamn I love these beautiful and smart ladies like Perino and Rice.
Comment by Frank M — December 21, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
Ooooh, look at the shiny lure!
December 21st, 2007 at 2:12 pmIf the public opinion is wrong, our leaders should be strong enough say “no†and refuse such nonsense.
Comment by Frank M
But public opinion cannot be ‘wrong’. If it is our considered opinion, then it is correct. It is up to our employees to change course and match up with that opinion – not work against it.
BTW – In America, we don’t elect ‘leaders’. We elect representatives. Leader is a word used by authoritarians to force a class structure on the people. Our representatives work for us – we don’t report to them.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:21 pmMaybe it’s just me, but this woman just makes me cringe! From the large gap between her two front teeth, to her strange grin, and her stiff gate (she walks like she has a stick up her pathetic ass)…I just can’t help but to find her nauseating in every imaginable way…
December 21st, 2007 at 2:37 pmBut public opinion cannot be ‘wrong’. If it is our considered opinion, then it is correct. It is up to our employees to change course and match up with that opinion – not work against it.
Comment by StratRat — December 21, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
This is a remarkable statement, StratRat. Public opinion in the South opposed desegregation, and it was clearly wrong.
We do indeed elect representatives. We are a Republic, not a Democracy.
Paying no attention to public opinion is as bad a leadership style as paying too much.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:40 pmOddly enough, the next TP article is about the resignation of our envoy to Sudan who basically claimed it was pointless to argue about the presence of genodice in Darfur as that wasn’t happening ……..
December 21st, 2007 at 2:44 pm“The idea that somehow this is a go-it-alone policy is just simply ludicrous.”
Sooo…. Get out of your missile proof limousine and join the throngs of people in the streets of the world cheering your policies.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:45 pmFunny that you should mention “facts”, Condi…
December 21st, 2007 at 3:14 pmWell, several posters here have reinforced my belief as to why mass manipulators always try to create communist states. Communists are just fascists with a good PR campaign, and when you are skilled at causing the masses to think what you want, you always desire a system of government with absolute power sanctified by public opinion.
The US has a representative form of government, INTENDED as a buffer to changing public opinion. This government does NOT respond to opinion polls, but DOES respond to ELECTIONS. In 2006, through hype, hiding of Reid and Pelosi, and ballot box stuffing in major cities, you managed to take a majority in both the House and Senate. Since then, they are now polling lower than any Congress in history, but haven’t changed their behaviours, so you see, ONLY elections matter.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:26 pmAnd one would only have to be not observing the facts, let me say that, to say that this is now a go-it-alone foreign policy.
NOW it’s not a go-it-alone policy? That implies that it once was… and the current state of affairs is due to that policy, whether currently in place or not.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:43 pmRice found something she can speak to.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:53 pmThe idea that somehow this is a go-it-alone policy is just simply ludicrous. And one would only have to be not observing the facts, let me say that, to say that this is now a go-it-alone foreign policy. […]
And so, I would just say to people, look at the facts.
So Condi, if we are not “going it alone”, tell us who we are going with. Who is backing us up. Who is defending us? Who will be there if we need help. I’m pretty sure the answer to all those questions is no one.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:36 pmI see this long drawn out battle over the difference between opinion polls, facts and whether polls should guide policy. A few important considerations in this argument.
1. An opinion poll results reflect facts: A fact is simply an observable and measurable phenonemon. A properly conducted poll will measure the attitudes of a particular population of people concerning an issue or belief. Thus, we know that the majority of Iraqis believe that killing American soldiers is acceptable. These feelings are a fact and an important fact to take into consideration in developing our foreign policy. It does not matter whether in fact it is wrong for insurgents to kill US soldiers. It is their opinion which creates more insurgents or terrorists. Opinion polls showed that a majority of Americans believed that Saddam had WMD even after the teams sent to Iraq had proven that fact to be false. Strong opinion did not suddenly create WMD in Iraq. However, it was a fact that a large number of Americans were either uneducated or misled concerning a very basic fact upon which continued support for the invasion of Iraq had been based.
2. Opinion polls should not change sound policy: Actually, it depends upon what policy you are talking about. The US must recover from the hatred that has arisen against it in the Middle East. The US has seen its “favorability” ratings continue downwards ever since its invasion and occupation of Iraq. Terrorism and insurgency only works with the support or tolerance of the populace in the area concerned. Turkey, which had the strongest approval ratings for the US (90%) now has the vast majority opposed to the policies of the US. Our misguided policy to disband the Iraqi military and De-Baathification of Iraq led to adverse public opinion as to the credibility of the United States and its motives in invading Iraq. Sounds like these opinions should have been listened to and incorporated in our administration of Iraq.
3. Polls only indicate a snapshot in time and should be ignored: We always hear this from those who are supporting a failed policy. However, there are very important policy considerations arising from a continued trend in public opinion. The longer a trend goes on, the more reliable it is as an indication of the mood of the people. In a democracy, such long term trends and the arrogance of a government ignoring the public concern is indeed troubling. Indeed, we saw a significant change in the congress due to the shift of public opinion. I doubt that the next president will be elected by supporting the Bush policy.
4. Huck’s statement about the United States foreign policy are true. The administration has had a bunker mentality. Indeed, its shrill, if not hysterical insistence that anyone who disagrees with their policy wants the US to lose, supports the terrorists or hates the country. Retired Generals and retired diplomats from previous Democratic and Republican administrations have noted the inability of this administration to exhibit intellectual curiosity on essential foreign policy issues or willingness to invite a diversity of opinions in discussions.
The US has gone it alone. Look at the alliance during Desert Storm and compare that to the pathetic “coallition of the willing.” Yes, the US has moderated some of its foreign policy positions, but only because of the constant rebuffs that it has received from other countries.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:45 pmIf the public opinion is wrong, our leaders should be strong enough say “no†and refuse such nonsense.
Comment by Frank M
If the “public opinion is wrong” according to who? To the Decider guy?
If you don’t think that public opinion should matter in setting policy, then you are not in favor of a democracy, you are in favor of a dictatorship. You do see the difference, don’t you?
December 21st, 2007 at 4:46 pmMaybe it’s just me, but this woman just makes me cringe! From the large gap between her two front teeth, to her strange grin, and her stiff gate (she walks like she has a stick up her pathetic ass)…I just can’t help but to find her nauseating in every imaginable way…
Comment by ForeverDem
It’s not just you. There is absolutely NOTHING appealing about this woman. May be why she has been single all her life.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:48 pm66 – Hendler, you really need to look into a Poli-Sci 101 course. You’re getting better over time, but still need to put some of those fundamentals in place to sound credible.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:52 pmYou do see the difference, don’t you?
Comment by bilbobaggins — December 21, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
He does.
This is the same person who has called democracy an “error” and who has pronounced himself in favor of a one-party rule, and a strong, authoritarian leader.
His fascistic rants are all over ThinkProgress…
December 21st, 2007 at 5:14 pm#73, tommy,
Your debating skills betray that you never attended college, much less studied “Poli-Sci 101″, so stop impersonating those who have.
I have a better reference for you “The Book of Isms (Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Socialism, Libertarianism), 11th Edition”, which clearly defines these ideologies, their similarities / differences, their roots, progressions and demises, so know exactly what I am talking about on this subject.
December 21st, 2007 at 5:29 pmOnly a fool would ever suggest that they knew anything “exactly”
December 21st, 2007 at 5:33 pmLUDICROUS IS HAVING A WAR CRIMINAL FOR A SECRETARY OF STATE!
December 22nd, 2007 at 7:08 am