Talk:Condoleezza Rice/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Untitled

I think this will not be an issue if people are treated fairly as people. I also agree that the reference to people as Black and White is very misguided for the fact that those who coin the language are those who want to exact some supperiority over one another. All the dictionary meanings of BLACK are negative while WHITE means positive.

That's all true, but the Black is Beautiful movement was all about taking back the term "black" and reinventing it to be a positive label. This has been pretty much successful. "Black" is pretty much accepted as a neutral term by the media; you'll have an uphill battle if you want to see that change.

In a radio programme here in Ireland, I heard this week that she gave up on piano at university in Denver after a contemporary played a piece on his first attempt that she had worked hard on for a year. Apparently she said "I can't be the best in the world at this, so I need to find something else" or something to that effect. Can anybody corroborate? If they can, I think its indicative of her character and worth including. Vdm 21:48, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I believe it was decided that the Chevron oil tanker would not be named after her. therefore, I have removed that reference. --Jiang

It was named after her in 1993, then renamed when she entered the government.

Surely these two facts are telling, whether they are permitted in the entry or must remain here, eh! Wetman 08:53, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

---

A Bit Useless

In the original version of Rice's biography I read, I found the article nothing but a list of accomplishments with the last paragraph contrasting and out of place. Is her testifying before the 9/11 commission really the highlight of her life? Right now, I'm working on fleshing out the article with more detail on her background, as well as the controversies surrounding her. No, I don't like her as a person, but as a resource, her article deserves better.

Who wrote this? Why don't you list your name? Keetoowah 21:24, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Single Black Female

Why do we need to know that Rice is "single and not married"? Would we make the same comments about a man in power? --ALC 22:44, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yes, we would. For instance, the first paragraph of the article on President James Buchanan mentions that he was a bachelor. Unless you're the Pope, being never-married and in a position of power is historically unusual enough to mention. --Kevin Myers 08:47, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have to agree, I find that "single and never married" sentence a little sexist myself. It's valid information, but there needs to be some context for it. (Zikzak23)

I think never married is okay. There is nothing sexist about that (since its also very important for men to marry), otherwise we should purge a substancial part in this Elizabeth I of England article. For example this "Soon after her accession, many questioned whom Elizabeth would marry. Her reason for never marrying is unclear. She may have felt repulsed by the mistreatment of Henry VIII's wives. Alternatively, she may have been psychologically scarred by her rumoured childhood relationship with Lord Seymour." I will try to explain a bit why it is necessary. Sometimes last week when she was in France, i for some reason was interested to know her family life. I visited wikipedia, and all i got was unmarried. I however couldn't tell whether this was due to devorce, so i visited her BBC profile. They were even more silent on this. Now, that left me with googling option, where you get all kind of stories. See, lack of information is information itself and avoiding handling it well only end up pushing people to other sources which are even more damaging. Also, avoiding it is a disrespect to her since it means we are ashamed of her choice.

Zikzak23, i think you would be interested to read this article. BBC uses the same word you are calling sexist. [1] Read the last 3 paragraphs

How do you pronounce her name? Does anybody want to add a pronunciation help? --Sonjaaa 09:48, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)

I've always heard KON-doh-lee-sah (rhymes with pizza). However, her name is based on the Italian music term meaning "with sweetness," which I believe is pronounced similarly but stressed differently: kon-doh-LEE-sah. I may be wrong. Garrett Albright 14:07, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The "kon" and "lee" syllables are both accented; I'm not certain which is primary and which is secondary, though.

How about adding the time she accidentally referred to the president as her husband?

Political Conversation: Condi’s Slip A pressing issue of dinner-party etiquette is vexing Washington, according to a story now making the D.C. rounds: How should you react when your guest, in this case national-security adviser Condoleezza Rice, makes a poignant faux pas? At a recent dinner party hosted by New York Times D.C. bureau chief Philip Taubman and his wife, Times reporter Felicity Barringer, and attended by Arthur Sulzberger Jr., Maureen Dowd, Steven Weisman, and Elisabeth Bumiller, Rice was reportedly overheard saying, “As I was telling my husb—” and then stopping herself abruptly, before saying, “As I was telling President Bush.” Jaws dropped, but a guest says the slip by the unmarried politician, who spends weekends with the president and his wife, seemed more psychologically telling than incriminating. Nobody thinks Bush and Rice are actually an item. A National Security Council spokesman laughed and said, “No comment.”[2]

I know this sounds a bit inflamatory, but I'm being serious. This was mentioned extensively in the media after it happened. If the thing about Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford farting in front of the Queen was included in his article, I don't see a problem including this. Not including it seems a little biased. Anyone remember during what interview this happened?--ConradKilroy 20:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Link

Is that hotseat link really necessary? It seems a little over-inflamitory to be a link for an encyclopaedia article... Soupfrog 17:08, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

---

Umm... Colin Powell really isn't African American, he's Jamaican-American. How to resolve this? --Golbez 05:05, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

He's not a hyphen-American at all; being born in NYC, he's just an American. Same with Condi. :P Garrett Albright 06:13, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Quite true, quite true, but was just fitting with the feel of the article as it is. My primary issue was that calling him "African-American" is simply false. --Golbez 15:06, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Actually, in U.S. common usage, he is considered African American. I would say we should have that in the article. Meelar 15:15, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

My objections are now in the history of both the article and the talk; do what thou wilt. Yes, most people erroneously equate "black" with "African American," but it's not our job to correct errors. ... oh, wait. ;) I don't mean this to be sarcastic or to attack you; I'm just saying, we should strive for complete accuracy. Fortunately, the press *might* know this, as I rarely (if ever, actually) have heard him referred to on television as an African American. Either way, what happens now is up to y'all. I won't start edit wars over this, as you are quite right, according to most people, he is African American, and his own page clarifies (though perhaps not strenuously enough) that his origins are Jamaican and American. --Golbez 17:58, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

African-American vs Jamaican-American

I won't turn this into an edit war, either, but I think this edit was totally an overreaction. First of all, I'm what I consider African-American, and I actually find the term "black" more offensive than "African-American." I'm not "black," my skin is brown. I know many people use "black" as a popular shorthand, but I disagree that it's less controversial than "African-American." Second of all, my parents are from Jamaica, but I've never heard the term "Jamaican-American," and won't expect anyone to use it. Third, Condoleeza Rice was born in the United States (Alabama specifically), so by those standards, she is literally an African-American and this didn't need to be changed. But consider this:

Entered in Google: +"Condoleezza Rice" +"African-American" = 18300 results; +"Condoleezza Rice" +"black" = 66400 results

By these statistics, "black" would be the most common term for Dr. Rice, so we'll let this go. Just don't change it to Alabama-American or you'll open a whole can of worms. -- zikzak23

To make things clear, I was not saying that Condoleezza Rice was not African American, nor that she should be termed only as black; my only objection was the labelling of Colin Powell as African American, which seems inaccurate. Your parents are Jamaican, yet you accept African-American as a description? True, it's become horribly generic in this PC age, but I was trying to just reinject a little reality into writing on race. Screw the third rail. ;) Either way, my point has been made, and, again, it pertains only to Colin, not Condoleezza.

The term "African-American," as originally defined, is supposed to apply to people whose ancestors were slaves in the American South. Anyone whose ancestors voluntarily immigrated to the U.S. from elsewhere, including the West Indies, is supposed to be a (Country name)-American, like Nigerian-American or Haitian-American. People of Jamaican background have some cultural traditions that are different from mainstream African-American society, and thus they are given a separate label. Colin Powell, technically speaking, is Jamaican-American. However, in everyday usage, many people use "African-American" as a general synonym for "black," even when they technically shouldn't.

That Google test is a bit unfair. The word "black" has many other meanings than race. Anyway, again, I emphasize that, being born in America, neither of them are (some place other than America)-Americans; they are merely Americans. And, yes, I realize that people use these phrases incorrectly to try to specify peoples' race... Am I just dreaming in hoping that that would be irrelevant? I know that I rarely feel the need to identify myself as a Portuguese-German-Welsh-English-Native-American... Garrett Albright 06:29, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

American really isn't a nationality none of anybody's ancestors including the so called "Native Americans" are not from here. Dudtz 7/23/05 9:33 PM EST

Picture

Anyone else agree that the thumbnail picture looks a bit odd?

Acegikmo1 15:09, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No, as bad as this is going to sound, I think it's just her. :-/ Mike H 22:54, Jul 24, 2004 (UTC)

Ack, that's harsh. Acutally, User:DO'Neil fixed it. Compare the current version with this one. IMO, she's moderately attractive for a fifty year old woman. She makes me think of that Cake song, "Short Shirt, Long Jacket". Anyway...

17:54, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Race

My change from African-American to black lasted 3 months 24 days. :) --Golbez 18:52, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

Bwaha, and the legacy lives on! --Golbez 04:46, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

em dash question

Hey, with respect to "Federal Advisory Committee on Gender — Integrated Training", shouldn't that em-dash (—) be an n-dash (–) or even just a regular hyphen (-) instead? I'm pretty sure that an em-dash is only used to indicate a pause in a sentence, and a few other cases, which don't fit the bill here.

Please see "The correct use of em and en" in this article: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/emen/

-- Ultra megatron

Titles

Why is the honorific "Dr." being used throughout the article? The use of titles isn't conventional in Wikipedia articles, whether it's Mr, Ms, or Dr. (whether MD or Ph.D), including articles on people with considerably more intellectual or academic accomplishment. Here it seems essentially an attempt to introduce a subtly defensive POV claim about the article subject's intellect.

Unless someone can provide a good reason for retaining them, I'm going to remove most of the titles.

- toh 07:30, 2004 Nov 3 (UTC)

Generally we don't use them. The correct name of the 527 group includes "Dr.", and the Boxer quotation that I just added uses "Dr.", so in both cases the title should be incorporated for the sake of accuracy, but otherwise it's superfluous. The same goes for "President" Bush. He's properly identified as the President the first time he's mentioned; after that he's just "Bush" except in a direct quotation from a source that said "President Bush". JamesMLane 00:40, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Presidential ambitions?

Following Bush's reelection victory in 2004, speculation regarding Rice's future became a hot topic and included the following possibilities, (1) she would be reappointed National Security Advisor, (2) She would be appointed to the Cabinet as Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense, 3) she would return to private life, or (4) she would run for President or Vice-President of the United States.

Has there actually been any published speculation regarding her running in the future as President or VP? This is the first place I've seen it mentioned. --NeuronExMachina 02:30, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, it depends on what you mean by "published." I've been seeing speculation about this on various political blogs for a couple of years. Here's an example:

http://americanprowler.com/article.asp?art_id=2002_4_17_22_19_28

-- Pat Berry 19:41, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This came up over at U.S. presidential election, 2008 and we agreed to list her as a possible candidate. See rice2008.com for a very early fansite. Samaritan 02:16, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What kind of doctor?

What kind of doctor is Rice? Ph.D.? It is better style to follow her name at the beginning of the entry with her credentials, rather than adding the courtesty "Dr." to the front. For example: Condoleezza Rice, Ph.D.

Council on Foreign Relations fellow: 1986, not 1996

Hello. Small correction: according to the Membership Department at the Council on Foreign Relations, Rice had an International Affairs fellowship from them from July 1985 to June 1986 (not 1996).

The CFR ofc said courteously that they are not allowed to give the amount of the fellowship. Does anyone know or surmise how much it would have been, in 1985-86? I'd like to see how it compared to the avg salary teaching Pol Sci in universities that year. She was also a Hoover national fellow at the same time. Anyone know how much that would have paid?

Margie Burns [email protected]

Trivia?

Where did this come from: 'Seventeen-year-old Topeka High School student Rachel Buck is in line to succeed Rice as National Security Adviser for President Bush's second term.'

Question about Hate Speech

When I first loaded the "article" page for Condoleezza Rice, I was presented with only three words: "evil, slutty, ni**er". When I refreshed the page, the normal content reappeared. As a newbie to Wikipedia, I am unaware of the proper procedure to make the community aware of this and how to track down and ban the author from this portal.

Don't worry; someone obviously noticed it and has either warned or blocked the vandal. And if they haven't, I will. Thanks for mentioning it, though, just in case. :)

By the way, if you see this happen, click "History" at the top of the screen, and then click the timestamp (date and time) of the second entry on the list - it is most likely the unvandalized version. (The vandalized version, if it hasn't already been repaired, would be the top). Then after that loads, click "Edit". It will warn you that this is an out-of-date version of the page; that's what we want. Just click "Save" and it will fix the vandalism. It would be good to put something in the "Edit Summary" box that you are reverting vandalism. Welcome to Wikipedia. :) --Golbez 21:38, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to see a little material on her books

Perhaps a paragraph or so should be included that looks at her publications, since part of her reputation is based on alleged scholarly accomplishments. We never hear what these are.

The article claims she speaks Russian, but I doubt this - I saw her on Russian TV attending a news conference on one of her visits here, and she had a translator next to her translating every phrase - it was clear she only understood what was being said after hearing the translator. So someone here must have been misinformed. Any objections if I delete that bit? Palefire 15:19, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

I have no idea how an editor can simply just decide that he or she just "doubt{s}" something to make a edit??? That is simply inappropriate. You should refer to a citation other than just simply doubting and then deleting. It is a fact that Condi Rice has read every single page of War & Peace by Tolstoy twice. I just don't have the time to look it up right now. Keetoowah 20:28, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

I took a few minutes to do a quick search of the Internet and I found five published biographies of the Condi Rice that verify that Dr. Rice speaks four languages and Russian is one of them. Just because she had a translator next to her does NOT mean that she does not speak Russian. When President George W. Bush makes joint appearances with President Fox of Mexico there are many translators at the two leaders beck and call to clear up any misunderstanding even though Bush speaks fluent Spanish. Now if review any press conference of Clinton you will see that Clinton had to have a transalator on site with Mexican leaders because he could not speak a second language. I believe that you are making this edit because you are jumping to conclusions and you did not do any research you merely were looking to back up your bias.

The biographies that back up the assertion that Dr. Rice speaks Russian include:

Condoleezza Rice: National Security Advisor (Great Life Stories) by Christin Ditchfield ISBN 0531123073

Condi: The Condoleezza Rice Story by Antonia Felix ISBN 1557045399

Condoleezza Rice: A Real-Life Reader Biography (Real-Life Reader Biography) by Linda R. Wade, Mitchell Lane Publishers ISBN 1584151455

Condoleeza Rice: National Security Advisor and Musician (Ferguson Career Biographies) by Bernard Ryan Jr. ISBN 0816054800

Condoleezza Rice: Being The Best by Mary Dodson Wade ISBN 0761319271

Also, you can refer to a short article about Dr. Rice by Andrew Sullivan:

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/people.php

I am going to put that back in the bio. --Keetoowah 03:56, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The above argument looks pretty funny. The first claim is that the person saw evidence that she does not understand spoken Russian (which doesn't ipso facto mean she doesn't speak Russian, but probably means she doesn't speak it well, if true).

The second argument scorned the first one, and quoted as "fact" a lot of hearsay evidence.

Is this because it is wikipedia policy to ignore first-hand claims and only consider published hearsay valid? I am not being sarcastic at all -- I think that that actually is the wikipedia policy (that first hand evidence is disallowed, and only hearsay published evidence is allowed).

I don't dispute the policy, but just want to point out that it makes for silly-looking argument here (especially the implied claim that only hearsay is factual, and not first-hand evidence).

I don't know who wrote the response to my comments because there is no name, time and date stamp listed, just a faulty response to my comments. First of all, I didn't state that she spoke Russian well. I just pointed out that she speaks Russian. The question was NOT: Does Dr. Rice speak Russian well? The question was: Does Dr. Rice speak Russian? Period. The answer is simply: Yes, she speaks Russian. Now if the question was: Does Clinton speak Russian then the answer would be: No, Clinton does not speak Russian at all. And as to the hearsay versus first-hand claims that is the dumbest argument I have ever heard!!!! Everything on Wikipedia is hearsay!!!! Of course, it is hearsay. Wikipedia is put together by people like you and me. Third party observers. These articles are not written by the first hand participants!!!! So using your logic the only way that I could have successfully responded to Palefire would be to track Dr. Rice down myself personally, somehow get to her through all of her State Department handlers and Secret Service agents, and ask her personally to tell me, a Wikipedian, whether or not she speaks Russian. That is moronic! Of course, I quoted third party sources, but at least I quoted four published biographies and I gave the direct citation for the source, to back up my claim that she speaks and reads Russian. Palefire merely was watching TV and saw a Russian translator standing next to her to support his deletion of Dr. Rice's claim that she speaks Russian!!! Palefire was watching TV. He was NOT a first person participant. Palefire was also a third-party observer. Palefire admits as much by stating that he/she saw it on TV. You are NOT a first person observer by watching something on TV!!! Just because I saw the fall of the Berlin wall on TV or the tanks converging on protestors on TV DOES NOT MAKE me a first person observer. I based my editing decision upon four published biographies. What did Palefire have? I would contend nothing. You really shouldn't be making the any statments about silly looking arguments. People who live in glass houses. . .-----Keetoowah 22:17, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's good to see Condoleezza has such an enthusiastic supporter. Knowing or not knowing a language is not really a yes or no question - I know several people who through this or that course of study have picked up some knowledge of Russian, and would happily put it on their CVs, but who for practical purposes can't really speak it (it's a notoriously tricky language for Anglophones). I do remember seeing her on Russian TV on several occasions, and the evidence to my mind was perfectly clear. And what the anonomous contributor above says about the use of evidence is point worth considering. If I was to publish this piece of information on my website and provide a link and a date, would that give it more authority?

All things considered, it's not an important issue, and I can't be bothered to go in and change the article, but the reality is probably this: she studied Russian, and has some knowledge of it, but her spoken Russian is weak.Palefire 08:07, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

And what was the thing about glass houses????Palefire 08:11, Feb 11, 2005

(UTC)

Basically, you are making the argument that when you watch TV then you are a first hand observer which is not true. Do you know Condi Rice? If you don't then you are a third party observer. 99.99999% of the Wikipedians are third party observer. You don't know her personally. You don't know whether she speaks Russian well or not. All we know for sure is that there are four published biographies that state definitively that she speaks and reads Russian.----Keetoowah 17:55, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This was a pretty entertaining series. I think Keetoowah is probably correct, that wikipedia policy is that published claims (especially in hardbound volumes) that she is fluent in Russian, trump mere visual evidence that she cannot understand modern spoken Russian. Palefire, even if you are a competent native speaker in Russian, and observe that she clearly annot understand Russian, that does not constitute wikipediac evidence, unless you publish it in a book, preferably hardback. :) ochin xorosho :) Tarjuhan 21:52, 27 May 2005 (UTC) Oh, yes, I also liked the argument that I cannot evaluate that a person is not fluent, merely by listening to them or talking to them; I must know them intimately -- that is also entertaining. The entertainment value of wikipedia is oft underrated, methinks. ~~

You are correct Wikipedia is quite entertaining. When I read comments such as yours where you misunderstood the original comment and then you comment on the original comment as if you really understood the original comment--leading to a conclusion on something that is completely off the topic. Thank you Tarjuhan for the entertaining off-topic response.-----Keetoowah 11:18, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

The use of a translator proves nothing. At formal events almost all heads of government and most diplomats will speak their national language, no matter which others they understand. There are a number of reasons for this, most prominently national pride, but also the avoidance of ambiguity and nuance that even an excellent non-native speaker could introduce, and that in the world of diplomacy could be disastrous (better to blame the interpreter!).

Of course, people like Albright (native speaker of Czech, high degree of fluency in Russian) and Kissinger (German) did not have these problems, but as prepresentatives of the U.S. they spoke formally in English even while visiting these countries.

From what I understand, Condi's Russian was at a fairly high standard a few years back, but as she has had little chance to use the language in recent years she's become a bit rusty; she has said as much as this when speaking to Russian radio.

ProhibitOnions 16:52, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Harper's Magazine, December 2004 Letters, p.4

I was concerned to learn that Philip Zelikow was the executive director of the 911 Commission and also a co-author with Condoleezza Rice of a book published some years ago. This sounds like a blatant conflict of interest situation to this writer.

---

Well, you were "concerned"!!! Why? You offered no explanation on what your so-called "concern" is. You don't even say who you are. What is the "blatant conflict of interest" and how is it a problem? What is the harm? I find this comment to merely be a a cheap political slight of fine woman. This probably should permanently removed from an encyclopedia. --Keetoowah 03:57, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Iraq-9/11 Link

I'm getting real tired of this edit war. Just because this is a biography article about Condoleezza Rice, doesn't mean that its only function is to serve as a mouthpiece for Bush administration propaganda. I stress the principles of the Wikipedia NPOV policy: "The policy doesn't assume that it's possible to write an article from just a single unbiased, "objective" point of view. The policy says that we should fairly represent all sides of a dispute, and not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is correct." By censoring my statement you are claiming that Dr. Rice's belief on this subject is the only one valid and worth documenting. I agree that this is not the right place to debate the validity of a link between Iraq and terrorism like 9/11, but to not acknowledge another belief on this subject would be clearly unfair and biased. As founder Jimbo Wales states:

"Perhaps the easiest way to make your writing more encyclopedic, is to write about what people believe, rather than what is so. If this strikes you as somehow subjectivist or collectivist or imperialist, then ask me about it, because I think that you are just mistaken. What people believe is a matter of objective fact, and we can present that quite easily from the neutral point of view."

I am not trying to show that Rice's belief is wrong, just that there are other beliefs that can be equally as true. --Howrealisreal 19:44, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I edited your sentence, focused it on Hussein (who is quite religious, he even put ALLAHU AKBAR on the flag) instead of the Baath Party, and linked to evidence on the wiki page. I understand your intention of wanting to offset Rice's belief of an Iraq-terrorism connection.

On a side note, as far as background info on Iraq and terrorism, this is some of the intelligence people generally agree is accurate and known at the time of the Iraq invasion: The 9-11 report says Osama himself met with an Iraqi official in Khartoum in the 1990's to establish terrorist camps in Iraq and get weapons. After bin Laden issued a 'fatwa' against the US/allies in 1998, al Qaeda was invited to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. Also in 1998, Iraqi officials met with the Taliban and bin Laden. Not to mention the U.N passed 14 resolutions and failed sanctions, foreign and US intelligence all relayed terrorism connections, Russian intelligence that informed us several times that Saddam was planning to terrorist attacks in the US and beyond, various known terrorists living in Iraq, an assasination plot against a US president, paying $25,000 to suicide bombers in the Middle East, Saddam and his sons' mass killings and WMD usage, invading his neighboring countries, Congress even passed a resolution in 1998 for regime change policy in Iraq, the Unit 999 of the Iraqi army was training foreign terrorists (including Mojahedin and al Qaeda) in Iraqi camps. Zarqawi who has direct ties to both al Qaeda and affiliated terror groups has been operating out of Iraq since May 2002, etc.... --RyanKnoll 00:48, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Reverted a little. But I think the status that it's at now is fair to both beliefs and allows readers to investigate additional articles, along with Rice's actual quote, to make up their mind for themselves. Good Compromise. --Howrealisreal 02:03, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

OK, but why do you bring up the Baath Party in the sentence? Relevance to Condi's statement? Why not just say Islamic extremist and Sadaam, leaving out the mostly secular (which is not true about Sadaam) and Baath Party part? It's not a big deal, but seems like odd to suddenly talk about the Baath Party. --RyanKnoll 03:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I added the link to the Baath party article because in that article it explains that Sadaam's government is based on a "mostly secular ideology [that] often contrasts that of other Arab governments in the Middle East, which sometimes tend to have leanings towards Islamism and theocracy." This is important because the terrorism that targeted the United States is of that branch of Islamic extremism, an opposite to the regime of old Iraq. Now don't get me wrong, Sadaam is far from an angel, and no doubt did operate his government with hatred toward the U.S., but I think tying him into a unique brand of terrorism that attacked here in NYC and the Pentagon is not fact. The link to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq article is fairly objective, and I commend adding it to provide additional reading on a subject briefly touched in the Rice article, but there is no harm to directing readers and writers to an article about what Sadaam's Baath government was all about.

On a side note, and this really doesn't have anything to do with our effective compromise in the article, I feel that just because "ALLAHU AKBAR" appeared on the Iraq flag does not undermine the founding principles of Sadaam's Bathist-style government. For example, we print "In God We Trust" on money, and even offer Christan services prior to business in Congress, but these ideals are thought of as symbolic, and we pride ourself in America as being secular. Anyway, I'm glad we took some time to discuss and reach an agreement instead of just going back and forth editing each other. --Howrealisreal 05:04, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

An aside to your aside: Americans do not pride themselves (as a country) on "being secular", but rather on permitting the free excercise of religion. America is not, nor has ever been, a secular nation. France, by contrast, is a secular nation, where the government seeks to excise religious elements from public society. Jewbacca 05:20, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

That is fair. I admit I mispoke. Thanks for keeping me on my toes. --Howrealisreal 06:43, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Whoever thinks that the Iraqi Baathists are religious rather than secular, is probably unfamiliar with Iraq, and especially unfamiliar with the Wahhabi movement at the wellspring of the Saud house and of Osama's case...

Aunt Jemima

Someone deleted my Aunt Jemima mention a while back, so I'm going to post it again here:

A radio host in Wisconsin, John "Sly" Sylvester, compared Rice to Aunt Jemima, calling her a "black trophy" of the Bush administration. He also referred to former Secretary of State Colin Powell as Uncle Tom.

Reading this again, I noticed that I failed to give the comment fair context. Can someone help me with this? I know it's notable enough to mention in the article, but I'm at a loss as to how to articulate it correctly. Mike H 18:11, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

I just read the biography of former President Bill Clinton and in that biography there is not every nasty thing ever stated about Bill Clinton in his eight years of Presidency. Sure, there are references to the scandal, etc. but every low and dirty comment from every two-bit low-life, like this talk show host in Wisconsin, is not repeated throughout his biography. Why are people doing that to Dr. Rice? Is it because she is Republican? Is it because she is a woman? Is it because she is an African-American? How about all of the above? Bill Clinton's bio is not filled with these cheap political shots why is it ok to fill Dr. Rice's bio with these cheap political shots? I don't think it is appropriate and it has no place in an encyclopedia. Read Abe Lincoln's bio. Pres. Lincoln was called every name in the book because he freed the slaves but in 99% of the biographies today there are not repeats of every nasty comment that people made about him at the time he was President--nor should they. We remember President Lincoln for his large accomplishments and his large failures, but we don't remember him for what some two bit writer at the Richmond, Virginia newspaper {or any other southern newspaper, for that matter} might have stated about him some century and a half ago because that writer has fallen into oblivion and President Lincoln's life lives on. Keetoowah 21:23, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Also, when you click on the cite that supports the fact that the racist comments were made the link does not work. The Yahoo story has been removed. Keetoowah 21:46, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

• If there isn't a page detailing every lie Ted Olson ever wrote about Bill Clinton in order to give the Starr jury something to chase, there should be. And so should there be a page detailing everything bad ever said about George W. Bush or "Dr." Rice. As for the link, go ahead and search for another when you put the paragraph back in the article. Blair P. Houghton 06:53, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Blair P. Houghton, please explain why you put quotes around Dr. Rice's title? She has a PhD and therefore she has earned the right to use the title. Do you know something which would indicate that she does NOT have a PhD? If you don't have something to back up the quotes why put them? I will assume that you meant it as disrespect for Dr. Rice. That surely puts your bias in clear perspective.-----Keetoowah 21:58, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• IMHO, I believe that when Harry Belafonte quoted Malcom X on the house slave and the field slave, he hit the nail on the head. I'm not trying to keep a sister down, but, one should keep in mind where his/hers roots are, and especially in Rice's case as a public administrator, who she's working for: Not corporations but The People. I'm not pissed at her because she educated. i'm not pissed at her because she's black. i'm not pissed at her because she's a woman. i'm pissed at her because she's using newspeak to facilitate for wars such as the one in iraq. I'm doubly-pissed at her because, there's a mention in her bio that she was raised in alabama and she can remember what segregation was like. if that's the case, she can also remember what a Jim Crow law was and how hypocritically those laws were worded. sorry for grammar, /lib/module/linux/kernel/language/english.ko segfaulted. also, gimmie 8 hours and i'll get you a link from cnn international on a couple of articles rice wrote, in which she contradicts herself within the dT of a year. Project2501a 09:13, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, you have had days and days of time, way more than 8 hours, and I still don't see the articles that you were going to produce to justify your criticism of Dr. Rice. Since, Project2501a, you haven't come up with these so-called "articles" in many, many days, when you boldly claimed you could do it in 8 hours, I will have to assume that the "articles" don't exist. Why can't you provide substance and facts to back up your claims and criticism? Since you are making wild and unsubstantiated claims without proof or evidence, I will have assume that your comments are filled with bias.-----Keetoowah 21:58, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Picture

I just added that picture because there wasn't one in there. Feel free to switch it to whichever picture is best.--Dmm246 23:57, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"Political career" section vs. "In the Bush administration" section

I find the distinction between the two sections, "Political career" and "In the Bush administration" confused and confusing. Can someone explain? For example one would think that there would be some mention in "Political career" of her being Secretary of State. However User:Jewbacca removed such a mention of this there as "redundant" presumably because this is covered in "In the Bush administration". Paul August ☎ 18:06, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

Labeling

She is an American, through and through. She is not naturalized, so adding "African-" or "Jamaican-" when describing her is just an attempt to divide. I am pretty sure that her lineage and ancestry within the USA extends much farther back than many of the famous "white" politicians who enjoy the privelege of being called simply "American." - JAA

I agree. This is unnecessarily polarizing, especially when it's in the first paragraph. First Afr-Amer SOS? maybe. First female SOS? maybe, too. But the "first Afr.-Amer female SOS". C'mon. Sfahey 00:38, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Personal life

I find it odd nothing is mentioned about her personal life as an adult. For example, is she married? Does she have children? In my opinion, i think that information is important and have no idea why it was missed.

The information that she is unmarried is already in the Trivia section. -- Curps 21:18, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Black

Yeah, I was tired and figured, hey, maybe it's time we restart the whole African American argument. This is wikipedia, isn't it? We want to be accurate, don't we? Then shouldn't we abandon politically correct buzzwords like "African American" when they are clearly inaccurate? --Golbez 16:22, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

"African American" was a politically correct buzzword 15 years ago, but today it's just the normal word for an American the majority of whose ancestors came from Africa. It's as neutral a term today as "black" was before it, "Negro" before that, and "colored" before that. It isn't inaccurate. --Angr/_comhrá 14:23, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, what do you call black people who are not American? (I once heard CNN claim that 90%+ of the population of Haiti were African-Americans. True story.) Zocky 01:41, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

I once saw someone call Othello African-American, without even thinking about it. When others corrected him on it, still others responded "but he was". Words have meaning. The more you can alter the words so that we don't think about what they mean, the more control you can have over thought itself. --Golbez 01:52, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

Zocky: Maybe you should check again what continent Haiti is part of. --Anonymous 21:44, Jul 1, 2005 (UTC)

Palestine or Palestinian Authority

In the reference to Dr. Rice's trip to the Middle East on February 7th, 2005, I noticed that there has been a dispute over what is the correct reference to WHERE she officially visited. She visited the city of Ramallah, which is in the Palestinian Territories. However, the area has an older more general name of Palestine. I think that either reference is correct. I just wanted to know what other Wikipedians thought. However, clearly referring to the area as The Palestinian Authority is not the correct reference because the PA is a legislative body and it is not the name of the area--for example, I live in the United States of America, the name of my country, I do not live in the U.S. Congress, the name of the legislature of my country. That is why I reverted the change from PA. It should be either Palestine or Palestinian Territories, not Palestinian Authority.-----Keetoowah 22:32, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Russian radio interview

Does anyone know whether she spoke Russian on-air during her interview on Russian radio? It would be nice if she had, if only to counter the stereotype that Americans can't speak foreign languages. --Angr/_comhrá 14:23, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

She definitely had, but the output of her Russian speech was laughable and on the level of a sophomore with major in linguistics. 'Twas frowned upon by me from the very beginning. According to this source [www.moscow2000.com/news/view2.asp?Id=14636&IdType=16], she struggled, but eventually answered with something like that: "Может быть, в будущем будет возможно дать интервью по-русски, но, понимаете, что очень трудно, потому что я без практики. И у вас есть в языке эти ужасные падежи, это очень трудно для меня, очень трудно говорить без ошибок." Which I would translate as follows ('sics' preserved): "Maybe, in future, it would be possible to give an interview in Russian, but, you know, which [sic] is difficult, because I am without practice [sic]. And you have those terrible (grammatical) cases, it is very difficult to me, very difficult to speak without mistakes." ;) --Dennis Valeev 23:46, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

I suppose we should be thankful she didn't say, "I am a jelly doughnut," in Russian, as JFK once did in German. --Christofurio 22:12, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

President Carter in Poland was translated as expressing his "deep lust for the Polish people". --172.216.196.73 17:43, 23 August 2005 (UTC) Gwydion M. Williams

disambiguation

hiya What about the Condoleezza Rice oil tanker? Should there be a disambiguation page? How else can you get to the oil tanker? I mean, suppose you don't know the new name for it. Tarjuhan

Searched on Google

I searched for Condoleezza Rice and it was near the top of the results for the Wikipedia link to the article. How comes it has a description on the search page though saying offering a biography and other stuff. How can this be done? • Thorpe • 20:55, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

critisism

I'd like to add an explicit section in the article on the critisism Rice has accummulated during her course in politics, specifically from harry belafonte. can i? Project2501a 01:24, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me--The_stuart 02:36, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cool, i wanted to ask first, because i don't want to get into an rv war. there are links that have critique on the bottom of the page, but there is none explicit critique of her in the page. what i read in this biography is a totally positive view of Rice, no flaws on her whatsoever, which i'm sure some here might label as NPOV. Project2501a 21:51, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

On 'con dolcezza'

Does anybody else find it an embarrassment to our nation's literacy that someone can take "con dolcezza" and turn it into "condoleezza" and pronounce it "condoliza"? "Con dolcezza" is not very hard to pronounce correctly, and maybe "Dolcezza" would make a more appropriate name. As a student of Romance languages, when I saw that Condi's name came from "con dolcezza", I laughed. Hard. Really hard. I'd imagine native speakers of Romance languages would find it amusing too. 66.44.3.120

Dear 66.44.3.120: You obviously don't have the guts to sign your nasty, possibly racist comments. There is nothing unusual about slight changes from one word to the next when it comes to names for people. An example is the name Libby, which derives from Liz, which derives from Elizabeth. I noticed that your IP address comes from Washington D.C. I would hazard to guess that you aren't what you claim you are but just a partisan hack who is attempting critize Condi. When I learned that you are from Washington D.C. and I saw your clearly childish and sophomoric comments, I laughed. Hard. At you.-----Keetoowah 2 July 2005 00:52 (UTC)

Dear Keetoowah: Please relax. I did not intend my comment to be racist. I'm just a student of Spanish and Italian and I think it's kind of silly how we Americans butcher languages that are simple and beautiful. I've noticed that English speakers have an uncanny ability to take words from other languages and turn them into some ugly word. Yes, I happen to be from the DC area (Maryland specifically), as I see you've gathered from my IP address. That doesn't mean I have anything to do with politics. I don't. If you think everyone who lives within 10 miles of DC is a political operative, you really don't know much.

By the way: do you even KNOW anything about how Italian is to be pronounced? This isn't like Liz to Libby. The "cha" sound of "dolcezza" is important. Also, where is the sense in starting a name with "with"? Am I to call you Withkeetoowah? What if I called you Witkayowah? That's similar to what Condi's name does to Italian. And Condi is supposed to be internationally savvy, to speak all these foreign languages... How is she to do this if she can't get her name straight? The bio here says she speaks Spanish. A Spanish speaker would know the difference between "dulce" and "duli". But I digress. 66.44.3.120

Fine you are not a political person. But she was GIVEN that name when she was born. Do you really think that Condi had anything to do with her given name?? I had no imput into the name I was given at birth and I believe most of us don't. Besides, what different does it make?? And finally, it is cultural superiority on your part to believe that only Americans butcher languages. Moreover, the one little change that either her mother or father made to a phrase

did not "butcher" italian. Italian seems to have survived the attack just fine. I believe strongly that it is just an unwarranted attack on Condi that is the real problem here. In my heritage, Cherokee, I read all the time about native speakers from the supposed intellectually superior continent of Europe who have butchered native languages like Cherokee all the time. I don't believe that so-called "butchering" of native languages minimizes the input that Europeans have made to world history and civilization. I find her name wonderful and I believe strongly that a generation from now there will be a host of young Condi's that you can act intellectually superior to.-----Keetoowah 2 July 2005 12:07 (UTC)

*COUGH*COUGH*COUGH*COUGH*COUGH*COUGH* pardon me, excuse me, has anybody seen my kettle? need to make some tea. nasty cough. let me know in my talk page if you see it, thanks. Project2501a 2 July 2005 02:17 (UTC)

Dear Project2501a: I saw the group picture on your photo album. I laughed. Hard. At you.----Keetoowah 2 July 2005 03:21 (UTC)

Good! Glad you enjoyed it! I got slapped with 10 days confinement to quarters for that! It was meant to provoke laughter against an injustice done by the Greek conscription system. Glad to see you support a just cause! Keep up the good work! Project2501a 2 July 2005 10:41 (UTC)

Wow, you people are freaks. Everyone butchers a foreign language. People cannot seem to speak English correctly either. Give someone a language they are not familiar with and they will eventually butcher the pronounciation of a word here or there. Even from area to area within the same language. Someone from Oregon might have no idea what someone from Louisiana was saying, AND THEY ARE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE! Just let it be. --Lord Voldemort 6 July 2005 18:19 (UTC)

Why do you feel the need to personally attack, oh Lord Voldemort? Especially since you did not even have a elementary understanding of what I was talking about on Condi Rice's talk page????------Keetoowah 6 July 2005 21:21 (UTC)

Actually, I was on your side until you took that tone with me. I was only trying to say that while there might have been an accidental change in the word (and no one ever said it was accidental... they probably did it on purpose), doesn't mean that they "butchered" the laguage. I only used that term because it was used before. People who use foreign words are bound to say one incorrectly. I wasn't saying that is what her parents did, I was just saying in general. And I didn't mean that you were freaks, I just meant that it was absurd to be fighting over this issue. People name their children a lot worse. It was my mistake for offending you. But what do I know? I'm just a Dark Lord. --Lord Voldemort 6 July 2005 21:31 (UTC)

All right, people, let's try the question again. "Condoleezza" is a made-up name. We know it is derived from "con dolcezza," but how? Did her parents, who as musicians would have known how to spell the phrase "con dolcezza," intend to name her Condolcezza, and there was a mistake of some sort (a registry-office clerk, perhaps) that led to it being recorded as Condoleezza? Or, perhaps, did they see the phrase misspelled and thought it had a nice ring to it? Surely they must have told her at some point. ProhibitOnions 17:06, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

As National Security Advisor

Was there any mention of Rice's role in Iraq as liaison to the President? I thought I saw somewhere in the media about Paul Bremer being on the phone all night talking to "Condi" every day.[3] Ariele 18:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

The Languages of Condi.

I've spent a couple of hours looking to find what langauges Condi speaks. I have found that she speaks four languages (a couple website say five, maybe they include English) which include French and Russian. Can anyone tell me what langauges Condi is fluent in? Thank you much. -lincoln

She does speak four languages. She is fluent in Russian (and English, obviously) and has a working knowledge of French and Spanish. She also studied Czech while working on her graduate degree. This information comes from my memory of the biography of Condoleeza Rice written by Antonia Felix. -R. Combs

oil tanker

It seems that the references for the Condi oil tanker of Chevron are slightly dubious. Any better media sources? phil