Democrats opposed to Rice nomination

WASHINGTON -- A handful of determined Senate Democrats Tuesday assailed President Bush's decision to invade Iraq and said they would oppose Condoleezza Rice's nomination for secretary of state as a principal architect of a failed policy.\nSen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, the senior senator, said Bush, with Rice's help, steered the country into an unprovoked and unjustified war based on false information that Iraq was a training ground for terrorists.\n"Dr. Rice is responsible for some of the most overblown rhetoric that the administration used to scare the American people into believing that there was an imminent threat from Iraq," Byrd said.\nKicking off the Democratic assault, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts charged that Rice, as Bush's national security adviser, provided Congress with "false reasons" for going to war. Had she not, Kennedy said in a speech, "it might have changed the course of history."\nSen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., accused the Bush administration of lying and said he was voting against Rice's confirmation as a way of trying to stop mistruths. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., charged that she concealed the Central Intelligence Agency's skepticism that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Africa for a nuclear weapons program.\nRice claimed there was a "consensus" within the administration on Iraq's activity when the Energy Department and the State Department had reservations. "She exaggerated and distorted the facts," Levin said.\nOn what was shaping up as a long day for the nominee and the president who promoted her to chief U.S. diplomat, Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., said, "We have a moral obligation to provide better leadership."\n"Those in charge must be held accountable for mistakes," Bayh said, even while acknowledging the administration was attempting to do the right thing in Iraq.\nOn the other hand, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, said that although mistakes occurred, it was wrong to rehash them. She lauded Rice for a "steady hand" in staying the course on the war on terrorism.\n"I think Condoleezza Rice is the most qualified person" for the job, Hutchinson said.\nSen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., commended Rice as a brilliant and passionate foreign policy expert perfect to head the State Department.\nRice's confirmation as Colin Powell's replacement appeared not to be in doubt. Sen. Barbara Boxer of California was among other Democrats lined up to get their licks in Tuesday, even though many Democrats may wind up in Rice's column when the vote is taken.\nTwo Democrats, Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and Ken Salazar of Colorado, spoke in Rice's favor before the Senate took a luncheon recess.\nRepublicans rallied behind Rice -- and Bush -- with briefer speeches. Nine hours were set aside for the debate, divided equally between the two parties.\nByrd and Boxer, opponents of the war from the outset, scheduled one-hour speeches. They consider the war a mistake and Bush's postwar strategy inadequate as determined insurgents take a rising toll of American casualties. They hold Rice at least partly responsible because she was White House national security adviser during Bush's first term.\nOn Wednesday, a brief series of statements by senators is expected, setting up the vote to put Rice in charge of U.S. diplomacy.\n"We are talking about the safety and security of this country, so I very much and very quickly want to move with Secretary Rice," Senate Republican leader Bill Frist of Tennessee said Tuesday. Frist said he was disappointed by the delay and was confident the Senate would confirm her on Wednesday.\nThe White House had been confident that Rice would be approved last week, and State Department officials were alerted to show up Friday morning to greet her with smiles and applause.\nDuring two days of sometimes testy hearings last week, Rice acknowledged not only some bad decisions on Iraq by the Bush administration but also that desertions and poor leadership within Iraqi security forces were hampering the country's defense.