The sexual life of Condoleezza Rice

Wu-Man

It gives me giggles every time I think of it. Although I do draw a line at imagining Condi in hot girl-on-girl action with Ellen DeGeneres...

That's now Dubya's

Instead of pointing out the irony of the fact that she may possibly be a lesbian (possibly without any evidence whatsoever), let's instead laugh over the following gays:

- Ken Mehlman, head of the RNC
- Mary Cheney, daughter of the vice president who gets paid hundreds of thousands of dollars off the RNC payroll
- Jeff Gannon - not only is he an RNC propagandist, but also a prostitute

Holy shit, why is someone from the UK government talking shit about us? Motherfucker, we drop bombs for less. Don't test us.

Does the name Ernst Rohm ring any bells for you?

slow with this one, but http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Secretary_of_State_who_keeps_private_0914.html

The worst thing about William Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. . . is the crazy gay-bashing he feels the need to indulge in every few pages.

I read the book a few years ago, and don't recall any gay-bashing in it. Which passages are you referring to? (or at least provide an example or two)

Oooh you mean she might be lesbian? Hot damn that is sexy!

Condi is a Dyke nyenye nyenye nye nye

only on new year's eve?

As long as she is 100% loyal to Bush and never, but never, crosses swords with Dick Cheney, she is welcome to stay on the team. Being in Bush's inner circle is a kind of marriage, y'know. haha, irony.

Andy Humm, a New York gay journalist who discussed the Iran hangings on his TV show Gay USA, says Rice's silence gives "consent"

This pisses me off:
1. it's so narcissistic, and just a bit racist. This might be a crazy thought, but maybe people in other countries do things, y'know, on their own behalf, rather than because Condi tells them to (if that)?
2. It's the prelude to an outing. I mean, she's Secretary of State, maybe she's got other things than her sexuality to take account of sometimes when she's doing her job. He's basically saying she shouldn't, or she's fair game. In other words, it's the same argument for excluding homosexuals from public service in the first place.

ladies n' germs, cap'n save-a-condi

I think your (1) is based on a misreading. I think he just means that by not condemning the actions, she was tacitly approving of them (consent as in "accept: give an affirmative reply to; respond favorably to; "I cannot accept your invitation"; "I go for this resolution""), not that she was telling the other countries what to do.

I don't know if (2) is supposed to be about her sexuality either; I mean, certainly in this case it could spin that way, but from a human rights perspective, the US should be expected to condemn that sort of thing, whether we're a bunch of dykes or not!

xpost

1. I take what you mean, but I think the guy is just indulging in the kind of lazy thinking that gives us "the US caused 9/11 because it armed the mujihadeen". Foreigners have their own agendas just as much as we do, they're not simpletons who can only react to our promptings.
2. Well, yes the US should be condemning that kind of thing. But she's balancing a big portfolio and maybe she chose to remain silent so as not to prejudice negotiations over the nuclear thing (or something). Saying she can't becuase she's gay (I'm pretty sure this is the guy's angle) is stupid.

I think the reason is that the the neo-con stated goal of bringing "freedom to the middle east" won't be much popular with the republican base if they realize that said "freedom" means making sodomy legal where it's illegal and so on and so forth.

Ismael: Right (about #2) but it's also his job, as someone promoting gay rights, to point out when she is condoning human rights violations -- and, for that matter, to promote politically important homosexuals to be as open about their sexuality as politically important heterosexuals are.

Or, in other words, it doesn't matter whether doing the right thing would be doing the wrong thing, we still need people to point out that doing the wrong thing is doing the wrong thing even when it might be doing the right thing in a larger sense. That's how politics works.

Condolezzie

Condi a bush loyalist? I've just assumed she's a workaholic type.