California Senator Barbara Boxer (D-UMB), perhaps one of the biggest proponents of non-living children in the United States, has actually criticized a woman for her appalling choice to not have kids.

This week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stared stupid straight in the face and lived to tell about it:

Rice appeared before the Senate in defense of President Bush’s tactical change in Iraq, and quickly encountered Boxer.

“Who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price,” Boxer said. “My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young.”

Then, to Rice: “You’re not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family.”

If it makes Boxer feel better, we’re all paying a price for her being in the senate.

Barbara Boxer is quite possibly the biggest doofus ever to enter the Senate chambers, including carpenter ants, mice, and the time Paris Hilton and her friends took a private tour. Each time she opens her mouth, out comes a bigger embarrassment than the time Robert Byrd ‘sharted’ during a filibuster.

So, is Boxer ultimately right to criticize Rice for having a say in foreign policy decision without having children of her own at risk? Jeremie Jordan sums it up right at the CornBeltwayBoys blog:

I don’t want my leaders weighing important war time decisions on whether or not it will affect their immediate families. Check almost any liberal blog and you will see a button or an advertisement that says something to affect of “send the Bush twins.” This attitude is clearly wrong. Bush and Rice need to make overarching policy decisions based on the greater good, not whether Barbara and Jenna will see combat and possibly die.

War sucks. War should be avoided at all costs. Life is precious, but unfortunately there are times when a nation must call on its’ military personnel to make the greatest of all sacrifices; putting their lives on the line. Whether or not a President’s son or daughter will be involved in the fighting should be part of the equation for war, but it should not be the overriding reason for it or against it. Basing a military decision solely on the personal welfare of one person just isn’t sound policy.

If it isn’t sound policy, you’ll hear it being promoted by Barbara Boxer. I do enjoy consistency in politicians, and Boxer delivers.


Note: If you’re seeing only this post, the entire blog can be accessed at


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.