Talk:Condoleezza Rice/Archive 1

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Link 

message: 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)
thread_title:  African-American vs Jamaican-American 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Titles 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Harper's Magazine, December 2004 Letters, p.4 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Aunt Jemima 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Labeling 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Palestine or Palestinian Authority 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Russian radio interview 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Searched on Google 

message: 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)
replies: text: Sounds good to me--The_stuart 02:36, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  critisism 

message: 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.  Ariele 18:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  As National Security Advisor