Comments

  1. 1

    spews:

    Taking advantage of an open thread….

    Ther eis an amazing article in Time about Mother Theresa. As SJ I am an aethesit who believes that there are great poeple who find something so wodnerful inside the,seleves that we should follow and learn fromt heir examples. TGhe names people give to this force, Jesus or Mitzvot, are all differner forms of disciplne, useful only because they drive good.

    In this context, I have always wondered at the conflict between devout Rc ism, with tis Mel Gibson image of a bloody Deirety, and the greatness of John XXIII and Cesar Chaves, inter alia.

    Well, this story suggests that MT was very much bothered by exactly this conflict.

    I apologize to all who read HA for Conflict and Obscenity and will return to that mode in future posts.

    story about Mother Theresa at SeattleJew

  2. 2

    bloody mel & bloody hell spews:

    Say what? If Mad Mel was showing a diety, it was a bloodied diety. “Bloody diety” has another, and false, connotation. Re Mother, please inform Hitchens.

    Earlier I misspelled MaNNlicher (Jackie said that Oswald was a “silly little communist,” not a filthy little communist), and Pete SEEger. Sample lyric, early 1940, before Hitler’s Germany invaded its ally, Seeger’s Soviet Union:

    Oh, Franklin Roosevelt told the people how he felt
    We damn near believed what he said
    He said “I hate war, and so does Eleanor
    But we won’t be safe till everybody’s dead.”
    ===================
    “Targets of the blacklist, even those who admitted being part of the Communist movement, have often been portrayed as nothing more than idealistic progressives, their politics characterized as essentially vigorous opposition to bigotry and fascism, as if communism in the age of Stalin were nothing more than liberalism with attitude. …

    “At the offices of the party newspaper, the Daily Worker, there would be staff meetings, a Communist official later recalled, ‘that rocked with laughter at the expense of famous intellectuals who pretended to think for themselves yet goose-stepped on the line we drew.'”

    – A Shadow of Red: Communism & the Blacklist …, David Everitt, 2007, not published by Regnery.

    Hope you leftists — Old, New, post-Marxist, progressive, whatever — appreciate how ridiculous you are.

  3. 3

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    … Clinton erupted in anger and waived his finger when asked about whether his administration had done enough to get bin Laden.”What did I do? What did I do?” Clinton said at one point. “I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since.”
      
    …December 1999 Memorandum of Notification (MON) he signed that authorized the CIA to use lethal force to capture, not kill, bin Laden. But the inspector general’s report made it clear that the agency never viewed the order as a license to “kill” bin Laden—one reason it never mounted more effective operations against him.

      
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20.....ek/page/3/
      
    Wow, another time Clinton wagged his finger and lied. Once again, fox news allowed a lie to be told. No surprise, it’s msnbc outing fox news for the lie.

  4. 5

    SeattleJew spews:

    @2 .. not sure if you want to be taken seriously BUT a good part of the reaosn I find the Time story so interesitng is Hitchens over the top bigotry toward theists,

    Unfortunatley, there is a Newtonian law that says “for ever action there is a reaction.” When the Rovian right pushes its buttons, slamming good people for atheism, gayness, or even belief in peace, the inevitable, if sad, result is that Hitchins, a really bright man, is pushed to turn his intellectual turrets and fire back.

    One opf the things I am proud of is that the people I support, the ones you call liberal or progressive, have not sunk to the depths of Rove.

    I wish there were some wy, w/o harming free speech, to outlaw Rove.

  5. 6

    meaning of is is spews:

    Martian Marvin @ 3: Clinton lied?! Pls say it aint so.

    Faux Fox was probably terrified of following up on Big Bill’s convenient untruths. Remember that Bill (an “unusually good liar” according to Bob Kerrey) was jabbing his fat finger into Chris Wallace’s lap while “extemporizing” the lie in question. Wallace & Ailes probably feared that the Big He was using the Big Lie as a pretext for building up to a seminal & eruptive DNA moment.

    The horror.

  6. 8

    ArtFart spews:

    5 That’s the true paradox of democracy, man. We’ve kept Charles Manson locked away all these years, simply because of what he said, and what the people he said it to were motivated to do as a result. Far more people have perished consequent to Karl Rove’s “self expression”.

  7. 11

    SeattleJew spews:

    @7 I grew up with italians so alliteration comes naturally !

    However, when I listen to Rove he reminds me of two people .. Lenina and Goebells. All three of these guys have/had no respect for truth or care for others. Rutless Rovian Repricans wiil, hope, be replaced by true Compassionate Conservatives, I also hope the demos will keep to waht has, amazingly, been a fair and unRovian campaign.

  8. 13

    Daddy Love spews:

    3 MS

    So because “the agency never viewed the order as a license to ‘kill’ bin Laden,” Bill Clinton was lying? A bit of a stretch, don’t you think?

  9. 14

    Daddy Love spews:

    A new poll of Iowa voters by the GOP firm Strategic Vision:

    Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months? (Republicans Only)

    Yes 51%

    No 39%

    Undecided 10%

    http://strategicvision.biz/pol itical/iowa_poll_082307.htm

    Yep — most Iowa Republicans want all the troops out of Iraq in six months. Why do Republicans hate America? Corn-eating surrender monkeys.

  10. 15

    ratcityreprobate spews:

    Check out the King County Elections Web Site. It indicates that 46,000+ people indicated they were voting in the republican primary, yet 49,000+ voted for Satterburg. Must be Stephan screwing with the voting machines.

  11. 16

    OneMan spews:

    Wow, Bush twists history until it’s unrecognizable as described in this Seattle Times Article.

    The war in Iraq is just like WWII. No, wait! It’s just like Vietnam! Forget I said it’s not at all like Vietnam!

    Douglas Brinkley sums it up nicely:

    “If we get into a Vietnam argument, the country is divided, but if you are going to try to sell this concept that the blood is on the American people’s hands because we left and were weak-kneed in Asia, that is a very tenuous and inane historical argument,” said historian Douglas Brinkley.

    George Bush — and his speechwriters — are all Horses’ Asses.

    -OneMan

  12. 19

    Daddy Love spews:

    18 Lee

    I just think that while they think it, it isn’t a make-or-break voting decision for them, and that other factors matter more in that decision.

  13. 20

    spews:

    @17
    Um, what?

    That editorial says what we’ve already known for years – that the Bush Administration took Al-Qaeda less seriously than the Clinton Administration did.

  14. 21

    Puddybud spews:

    Lee: The editorial says Bill didn’t take Al Qaeda seriously after all his public posturing starting with his lies on Long Island in 2002.

  15. 22

    OneMan spews:

    I know I’ll regret getting into this but…Puddy, read for fucking content dude. The piece states that Tenet was much more focused on al Qaeda before the Bush administration came into power than after.

    Why? Because the Neocon asshats changed the rules (and ignored the warnings).

    Sheesh.

  16. 23

    SeattleJew spews:

    @16 one Man

    Why say such bad things about a horse’s ass?

    Just compare:

    Horse’s Ass Bush Regime

    evacuates feces retains feces
    covered by luxurious tail covered by miasma
    tied to muscular hind limbs derives no obvious purpose
    eponymic for free speech an end to itself

  17. 25

    Daddy Love spews:

    24 T

    Sure, pal. Who ever said that they thought that increased troops levels in localized areas would not result in some improvement in terms of reduced violence in that localized area? Of course it would. I’m sure that’s what you mean when you think the escalation is “working.”

    But overall violence levels in Iraq are not down, which means that whack-a-mole doesn’t work, which anyone with a brain (this excludes you, I know) already knew.

    And the government is falling apart, because all the Sunnis and the Sadrists pulled out, which is the opposite of what the escalation was supposed to accomplish: giving the government some increased security to give it a chance to unify and reconcile. But no, we’re farther from that goal than ever, which means that “surge” ain’t working.

  18. 26

    spews:

    @21
    Um, what? Are you reading the same editorial I am?

    Clinton actually ordered cruise missile strikes to get Bin Laden. WADR, what are you talking about?

    No one says that Clinton was perfect in how he went after Bin Laden, but no one who’s sane thinks that Clinton was as bad as Bush. When the Bush Administration took over, Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda was significantly de-emphasized as a concern.

  19. 27

    spews:

    @24
    That’s so adorable. Did your mommy help you draw that?

    In case you’re wondering why we’re laughing at you, it’s because the success of a military operation makes little difference in a situation that can only be remedied by political solutions.

  20. 28

    Daddy Love spews:

    Iraq is in a civil war. We aren’t stopping it, we aren’t slowing it down, and in fact we are arming the various factions. If we leave, things won’t be great there, and that is a massive understatement. But if we stay, we know by now that it won’t be better, and it might very well be worse. For them.

    For us, the difference looks even more clear. If we leave Iraq, things will be MUCH better for us. We’ll stop hemorrhaging $10 billion a month on nothing. We’ll give our noble, overworked soldiers a well-deserved rest. We can rebuild our armed forces from the gutting this has caused. We will have a credible military deterrent again. We can focus on fighting, capturing, or killing the terrorist enemies of our country instead of fighting a bunch of people just because they want us to leave their freakin’ country (a sentiment I totally understand).

  21. 29

    Daddy Love spews:

    27 Lee

    Not only a political solution is needed, but other things not flowing from military solutions are needed, such as reconstruction (which we never did), electricity, water, and so on.

  22. 31

    ArtFart spews:

    29 The latest about the electricity situation has it that the central control of the power system was knocked out by our forces in the invasion (to “render Saddam deaf and blind”, or something like that) and has never been rebuilt. Now, each of the major power plants and distibution stations (most of which are in the south) is controlled by a different warlord. The “government” in Baghdad has to call these guys up every day and negotiate for a few hours’ worth of juice at whatever rate they’re desperate enough o pay.

  23. 32

    Goldy Wadsworthless Longfellow spews:

    Ahem:

    There’s a leftist rag in Seattle
    Brim fill’d with PC-pumped prattle
    ‘Twould be such a drag
    If they couldn’t brag
    That (Fibby fatwa be damned and boat bombs be jammed)
    Praise Allah, they never will tattle

  24. 33

    Edna St.Vincent Goldstein spews:

    Higgledy piggledy
    Sheikh David McCumber
    Newspaper editor is and as such,
    While stroking jihadi boatpeople, doesn’t do much

    haiku to you too
    goo goo ga joob walrus egg-
    man! Pee Eye shit stink!

  25. 34

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    #30 michael says:

    If all else fails, blame Bill Clinton! What do you do when blaming Bill Clinton fails?

      
    Blame president hillary clinton.

  26. 35

    Seattle Slough spews:

    ” … Lenina and Goebells. All three of these guys have/had no respect for truth or care for others. Rutless Rovian Repricans …”

    By Godrey, it would be so damn good if postal chadt came crawling back to his HA pew so we could have some serious insanity for a change, instead of the unreasonable facsimile quoted above.

  27. 36

    Seattle Spew spews:

    president. hillary. clinton.

    Have you at long last, Marginal Marvin, no sense of decency? How can you type those evil words — president hillary clinton — without skulking away in the soul’s dark night into the lowest circles of Dante’s hell?

  28. 37

    Rabid Rabbit spews:

    Ceteris paribus, Roger has a facile facility for taking absurd outtakes from out-of-context theatre. He grabs important-looking but nonsensical data, throws them at the page, and pretends that they stick. They don’t.
    His stuff about tax cuts, tax receipts, and job creation, for example, hinges on a baseline, 1925, that seems to cover every angle by making the angles obtuse. 1925, the cusp of a worldwide economic meltdown, is chosen because it promptly puts Republicans in the deep hole of 1930-1933, and because it obscures Democrat failure from 1933-1940.

    FDR’s New Deal, grafted from Herbert Hoover’s, failed to stop the depression and to end unemployment. “Bolshevik Burt” Wheeler, Montana’s senator from 1922 – 1946, FDR’s first prominent cheerleader in 1932, told the truth: FDR’s socialism didn’t create jobs; FDR’s war did. That’s why, wrote Wheeler, FDR was semi-secretly pushing us into war two years before Pearl Harbor.

    If Democrat presidents since 1925 deserve credit for creating jobs, then they deserve credit for the destructive stimuli (WWII, Korea, Vietnam) that really put our nation to work. That’s particularly true of two warmonger Democrat presidents from the 1960s.

    (Perhaps the biggest blunder of the current blundering administration is that it replicates the 1960’s Democrat stimulus model: pump the economy with war and guns; pump the economy with entitlement butter; grease the guns with butter and pay for it all with a credit card.)

    If Roger had drawn his baseline in 1892, on the cusp of the Democrat Great Depression, he’d have shown similar Republican/Democrat terms and tenures but with very different results for job creation. Anything or nothing can be proved depending on who draws the baselines. That’s Roger’s trick, and Jared Diamond’s, and Al Gore’s. That’s why otherwise sensible neo-Marxists can take Gore’s con seriously.

    As for tax cuts, JFK’s or Reagan’s or Baby Bush’s, it’s nuts to draw conclusions from tax receipts in the fiscal year of the tax cut or in any other year unless there’s an attempt to hold other variables constant, something almost impossible to do.

    (The post-Kennedy tax cut didn’t lift all boats, as JFK predicted, but the cut coincided with a long and inflationary boom. Business, jobs, and tax receipts grew, but the boom had many fathers, including the destructive stimulus of a Democrat war. And of the military-industrial-Democrat complex: Kennedy, remember, was voted in by vote fraud and by false fraudulent claims that Eisenhower Republicans permitted a “bomber gap” and a “missile gap.” Eisenhower, who ended the Korean War, had two recessions, jobs lost. Kennedy and Johnson powered up the economy with bombers, missiles, corpses, and bombs. That’s why it was a Boom.)

  29. 38

    SeattleJew spews:

    #35 slough
    You really think that Karl Rove has any concern for truth?

    Can I sell you a war? …\\

  30. 39

    Rovian & Proud Of It spews:

    Yes. To the first question.

    No. To the second.

    Iraq wasn’t Rove’s war. South Carolina in 2000 wasn’t his push poll. McKay wasn’t his US attorney. Plame’s name wasn’t his blame game. Rove was apparently so respectful of truth that even FitzGerald couldn’t trip him up in about five tries. Rove isn’t being frogmarched out of the West Wing. He’s walking out.

    I’ll admit that some of us were unhealthily obsessive about Carville, about nine years ago, but it’s because Carville was insane about Ken Starr. We give Ragin’ Cajun Carville credit, though, for playing an ugly game very well. Maybe you’ll eventually achieve the maturity and serenity to confer the same credit upon Rove, who earned it.

  31. 40

    Historian Christy Brinkley spews:

    # 16: Check Douglas Brinkley’s fat book about Jimmy Carter … the part about Carter trying to break up the coalition of Gulf War I, the part that uses the word treason. Then remember that Carter condemned our current Gulf war because we didn’t build a big coalition.

    Clinton? I despise him but admire his skill. Carter? I despise him. Because, as Qaddafi Duck or somebody said, he’s dethpicable.

    Douglas Brinkley’s from Tulane. Have some good stuff from him and others about Chocolate Ray Nagin’s buses and Democrat Blanco’s corruption, if anybody wants it.

  32. 41

    Daddy Love spews:

    37 RR

    Sure, pal. You and your Republigun buddies never cite only a favorable time frame, or cook the intel, to make your lying fucking miltaristic point(s). Tell us another one, friend.

  33. 43

    spews:

    @40
    Maybe you’ll eventually achieve the maturity and serenity to confer the same credit upon Rove, who earned it.

    Karl Rove employed the kinds of tactics that have turned an entire generation of young people against the Republican Party. I give him all the credit in the world for that. In 2009, I will gladly thank him for giving us the progressive majority this country needs to become the greatest country in the world again.

  34. 44

    Daddy Love spews:

    Iraq wasn’t Rove’s war. South Carolina in 2000 wasn’t his push poll. McKay wasn’t his US attorney. Plame’s name wasn’t his blame game. Rove was apparently so respectful of truth that even FitzGerald couldn’t trip him up in about five tries. Rove isn’t being frogmarched out of the West Wing. He’s walking out.

    Iraq may not have been “Rove’s war,” but he used it ruthlessly for partisan gain. A man who is concerned about America’s security interests he is NOT.

    South Carolina wasn’t his push poll? Don’t make me laugh. Yeah, Bush’s head political operative, known for his lifelong record of especially nasty dirty tricks was not involved in this. Uh-huh.

    Plame’s name wasn’t his blame game? Matt Cooper testyified AFTER he went to jail to protect the asshole that Rove called him and identified Valerie Plame as “Wilson’s wife” who “works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction].” According to Cooper, his conversation with Karl Rove was the first time he had heard anything about Wilson’s wife. Additionally, Rove told Cooper that further information discrediting Wilson and his findings would soon be declassified and ended the phone conversation by saying “I’ve already said too much.”

    http://thinkprogress.org/leak-scandal

  35. 45

    jsa on commercial drive spews:

    SeattleJew @ 1:

    Fascinating original article. Thanks for pointing that out.

    I’m not really surprised, actually. If you spend your days ministering to the poor, the sick, and the wretched of Calcutta, your belief in a just, kind, and loving diety would be stretched pretty hard.

  36. 47

    Bad Dad spews:

    Look. I’m not going to bet my farm on the paternity of the push poll. Best bet now is that enthusiastic rogues, not Rove, pushed it.

    How does one ruthlessly use for partisan gain a war that we’re not winning or that we’re losing? The meme of loss was dominant in 2004 (that’s why Bush’s margin — definitive only in comparison to 1992, 1996, and 2000 — was so marginal. That’s why it was a flat-out loser in 2006. (To show ruthless use of a war for partisan gain, you’d have to show Rove talking about not changing horses in mid-stream … but that was FDR’s winning line from way back when.)

    As for Rove and Matt Cooper, I heard them both on Sunday’s Meet the Depressed. Rove said he crossed no line. Cooper said Rove was being Clintonian. Well, Cooper almost said that … you know what I mean. Whatever Karl said to Matt, Matt was bounced and Rove walks, unindicted by a mad-dog prosecutor who wanted in the worst way to indict him.

    If any prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich but Fitz couldn’t indict Rove, you’ve got to get over it. Rove was clean.

  37. 48

    Killa Kowski spews:

    Article of faith? It’s a(n) historical artifact, useful in some contexts, not in others.

    Rove’s tactics? They were good when he was pulling down wins, otherwise bad. Just like Carville’s: Good in 1992, bad in 1994, supplanted by Dick Morris’s (if you believe Dick Morris) in 1996 and 1998. Same old ugly stuff, whether R or D.

    As for the kids, they’ll eventually grow up and go Republican, if Republicans can spin their way out of this bad war. And good for them if they can.

  38. 49

    spews:

    @47
    Rove very rabidly pushed the meme that opposing the war was equal to opposing the troops or opposing the U.S. entirely. It certainly worked for a while and certainly played a role in keeping Bush from being booted in 2004 (many people who bought into the frames then regret it now). Rove isn’t much different from other political operatives like Carville, but he will be seen as worse than all of them, and I also do not believe that he’s escaped all possible legal problems either. Rove has had a lot of tools at his disposal to make it very difficult for even an aggresive prosecutor like Fitzgerald to be able to press charges.

  39. 51

    spews:

    @39 Rovian & Proud Of It

    Comparing Carville and Rove is itself a Rovian act. I challenge you to identify three evil deeds ,.deeds that fa;sified the truth, in the Clinton campaigns. Rove’s mentor, Jo Goebells had a word for this … the big lie.

    As for the lack of persecution of The Rove, all that does is establish that he remaoins innocent until proven guilty. The data that FitsG found is clear, Rove intentionally outed a CIA agent to discredut her husband. Is this a crime? Not if Libby conceals who told him what to do. What do you suppse hap-pens when Libby is called to testify before Congress? The little man has no fifth amendment rights now that he is a felon.

    Lee was nice enough to thnak you for fucking up the GOP. He and I disagree, I WANT two good parties. This man not only undermined the GOP, he umdermined his country. If he had done this in the pay of e; Qaeda, he would be guilty of treason.

  40. 52

    spews:

    @47 clean? Clean of what?

    1. FitzG is anything but a mad dog. he ,may be a bit pious but he is republican, someone you guys should treasure and hope he will pull the cinders of the GOp out of Rove’s fires.

    2. Rove got off because he claimed no ojne could prove he had intent. Intent is hard to prove. NOW, you tell me why Rove outed a CIA agent??

    3. If the gOP goes the way of the WHIGs after their idiotic Alen and Sedition Act, our one party state will owe this bad outcome to three people ..the idiot playboy who gt to be Prezzy, hus saturnine uncle the vipereep, and the wizard behing the curtain von Braun
    Rove.

    I hope the dems do not win it all. I hope that the GOP gets its rancid parts cut off before the body dies of gangrene.

  41. 53

    Daddy Love spews:

    47 BD

    you’d have to show Rove talking about not changing horses in mid-stream

    Yeah, too bad Rove never brought out a phrase like “stay the course.” Oh, wait…

    A Fitzgerald indictment or conviction is not and never was the standard of anything. Karl Rove indisutably revealed Valerie Wilson’s identity and her covert work to several reporters as part of an organized effort (in which Irving Libby and Ari Flescher, to name a few, tok part) to disseminate just this information to personally discredit Ambassador Wilson after his embarrassing and damning revelations. Defend that.

  42. 54

    Daddy Love spews:

    47 BD

    …the push poll. Best bet now is that enthusiastic rogues, not Rove, pushed it.

    Based on what? My research indicates that no one knows the anonymous pollers. To me, that says that the “best bet” is the the known slimeball running Bush’s political organization who is already well-known for such tactics was behind it.

  43. 55

    spews:

    @51
    Lee was nice enough to thnak you for fucking up the GOP. He and I disagree, I WANT two good parties.

    Steve, that is a misrepresentation of what I meant and you know it. I think we need a balance between left and right, but I think this country has shifted too far to the right in recent years. What I was thanking Rove for was making it easier for people (especially young people) to see the danger coming from this shift. I have never (and would never) disagree with the idea that we should have two parties.

    I’m truly sick and tired of this bullshit from you, and you going to stop? As I said before (and have done before), I will be deleting any comments from you that intentionally misrepresent my positions.

  44. 56

    spews:

    @52
    1. FitzG is anything but a mad dog. he ,may be a bit pious but he is republican, someone you guys should treasure and hope he will pull the cinders of the GOp out of Rove’s fires.

    Fitzgerald is definitely an aggressive prosecutor, but he has long unimpeachable record of being non-partisan about his prosecutions.

  45. 57

    Rovian Pavlovian spews:

    ” … Rove isn’t much different from other political operatives like Carville, but he will be seen as worse than all of them …”

    If that’s truly the truth, if he will be seen as worse, it’s only because Big Swingin’ Dick Nixon was right: History isn’t written by the victors; it’s written by the Democrats. As I’ve typed before, Rove/Bushstein beat you morons at your own moronic game. That’s why you hate them.

    As for the losing year 2006 & beyond, you may be right. As I’ve typed before, this does look to me like a realignment right down to the (pun intended) fundamentals. If a facsimile of the GOP survives, it will either be only a nativist rump of fundamentalists or of Democrats 2.0, Rudy Bloomberg (burg?) and similar geeks. The kids are gone, as you noted; they’ll finally be induced to put down their dope and vote, and they’ll vote Goldycrat. Probably forever.

    SJ: I apologize for being snarky with you yesterday because, almost alone here, you try to be thoughtful. That’s not the same as being fair & balanced: “Comparing Carville and Rove is itself a Rovian act. I challenge you to identify three evil deeds ,.deeds that fa;sified the truth, in the Clinton campaigns …”

    It’s not necessary to dig deep on this one. Just check out Carville’s War Room (SPL# DVD 324.973 W195 2004). Evil deed 1 = Bimbo Eruption 1, Genifer Flowers, and Bill’s big bunch of lies about it. Evil deed 2 = The collateral damage from #1, the smear of Cuomo in which Clinton implied that St. Mario was a mobbed-up alliterative Italian. Evil deed 3 = Clinton’s big bunch of lies about the draft. He didn’t even have the balls to defend Texas airspace from incursions by the evil empire, Oklahoma.

    Clinton’s 1992 campaign, in fact, was evil deeds from beginning to end (e.g. claiming that Bush 41’s mild 1992 recession was the worst economy since 1932), and Ross Perot let evil win. (I’m not really so unhinged as to impute evil to pathetic pukes like Carville or Clinton, and I give them credit for fooling most of you most of the time. There were times, in fact, when Clinton was a rather good Republican president; as with Eisenhower, eight years of more-or-less peace and prosperity are indicators of a more-or-less successful presidency. That many of you secular fundamentalists seem to ascribe an atavism like ‘evil’ to Rove and Bush is ironic and frightning, but there’s nothing like losing a war to concentrate the minds of some of us or to unhinge the minds of some of you.)

    As for letting yourselves be pawns of Joe Wilson’s lust for celebrity, admit it: There’s no big there there. Probably innocent, Rove is demonstrably not guilty. Mad Dog Fitz proved it. Rove walks and Joe gets his book deal and his movie deal. Big deal.

    We got over Vince Foster (the simple explanation, suicide, was best) and we got over the hole in Ron Brown’s head; it was just a hole in Ron Brown’s head. You & you & you need to get over your unhealthy obsessions with Rove and us Rovians, because unhealthy obsessions are making you sick, you sickos.

  46. 58

    Rovian Pavlovian spews:

    Darryl: Yeah, I saw your “policy” about big hunks of copyrighted material, so here’s a little hunk without which #2, above, doesn’t make sufficient sense: “Before the Popular Front the party had branded Franklin Delano Roosevelt as a fascist (specifically a social fascist, a CPUSA term for a reactionary who pretended to be liberal). Now Communists portrayed the president as a progressive, and they transformed the party into an enthusiastic booster of New Deal policies. Party literature and speeches might still mention Lenin and Stalin, but now they were more likely to invoke the legacy of revered American icons …” – Everitt, 2007, page 32.

  47. 59

    Daddy Love spews:

    57 RP

    Yes, it’s easy to see how much you have gotten over Bill Clinton. Boy, if he didn’t exist you’d have to invent him.

  48. 60

    Clone Clinton spews:

    I ‘said’ we got over Vince Foster and Ron Brown.

    You really need to try to keep up, here. Pay attention.

  49. 61

    spews:

    @57
    As for letting yourselves be pawns of Joe Wilson’s lust for celebrity, admit it: There’s no big there there. Probably innocent, Rove is demonstrably not guilty. Mad Dog Fitz proved it. Rove walks and Joe gets his book deal and his movie deal. Big deal.

    Sorry, but a covert CIA agent working on non-proliferation was outed. If the Clinton Administration had done that, the chances of you saying there’s “no big there there” would be between none and none.

  50. 62

    Dan Schorr Outed Covert Agents spews:

    Man, we’ve done this dance. Whatever ‘covert’ is, Plame was not it, despite what CIA bureaucrats alleged. That’s why Susan Estrich told Stephanie Miller (stop me if you’ve heard this before) there was no underlying crime. Libby’s crime, like Bill Clinton’s, derived from the process of investigation. Bill and Libby lied, or their testimony was too inconsistent with their previous testimony.

    Rove did not provably lie, dispite what Matt Cooper alleged on Sunday, and Rove kept his grand jury stories straight. End of story.

  51. 63

    Puddybud spews:

    OneMan: I never commented on George Tenet. DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEFLECTION!

    I commented on Billy Boy who said he was consumed at getting Osama. LIES. LIES and MORE LIES!

  52. 64

    spews:

    @62
    Whatever ‘covert’ is, Plame was not it, despite what CIA bureaucrats alleged.

    Are you retarded? The CIA bureaucrats are the people who get to decide who is covert and who is not.

  53. 65

    Puppy Love spews:

    No. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act, drafted in response to earlier betrayals of covert agents, defined the terms of debate. By its multi-part test, Plame was not covert. That’s why Armitage, the proto-leaker, was not indicted by Fitzgerald.

  54. 66

    spews:

    No. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act, drafted in response to earlier betrayals of covert agents, defined the terms of debate. By its multi-part test, Plame was not covert. That’s why Armitage, the proto-leaker, was not indicted by Fitzgerald.

    That’s not correct at all. The reason that the leakers were not indicted had nothing to do with whether or not Plame was covert (she was, as even the HEAD OF THE CIA ADMITTED SO), it had to do with their inability to prove intent.

  55. 67

    Push Push in the Bush spews:

    Meaning that neither Libby, nor Armitage, nor Rove, nor Cheney had intent to out a covert agent? That tortured, water-boarded explanation fits the outcome (not even a ham sandwich was indicted for outing a covert agent) as well as my explanation. I’ll take it.

  56. 68

    spews:

    Meaning that neither Libby, nor Armitage, nor Rove, nor Cheney had intent to out a covert agent?

    No, meaning that it was impossible to PROVE intent. Jesus, it’s like trying to explain calculus to a kindergardener.