Karl Rove is a jackass. This is not new news. I don't know why I find myself riled everytime I hear a story about how he opened his mouth to spout yet another inane and imbecilic remark. I should be used to his pedomorphic reasoning by now.
Yet I also don't understand why Dems are demanding apologies for Rove's latest hot-quote: "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war. Liberals saw the savagery... and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding to our attackers."
And now, Republican back-up sheep are currently baa-ing behind Rove saying that he shouldn't issue an apology and that "he was outlining a philosophical divide between a president who sought to win the war on terrorism by taking the fight to the enemy and Democrats who questioned that approach."
HUH? Nothing like supporting stupid with more stupidity.
I'm sick of Elephants and Donkey's. Quit your bitching, stop attacking each other and actually DO something...like be a leader instead of a kindergartener, perhaps?
6 comments:
I couldn't agree more. But I do see where Democrats in congress are coming for. ( I will now be entering a long political/religious rant. you may want to stop reading now)
For a long time republicans have been stupid misguided ass holes. They feel that the only way to win a war is to make more enemies. They continue to piss off the entire muslim community around the world. And to go back to the flag burning amendment, why are they worrying about this when they should be worrying about a war that we should not even be in. I am pretty sure than 99% of the burning of an American flags goes on in other countries (ie. Iran, Iraq, North Korea). Another thing about the burning the American flag is that the official code of conduct concerning the American flag says that it should be burned once it becomes old (Once again republicans are not thinking).
(Now I will go into the religious part of my antielephant rant.) Republican try to claim that Democrats are not christian. First off why should that matter, isn't there supposed to bea thing called seperation of church and state. Seconed of all Democrats show more christian behavior than republicans. We show peace and love towards all people. We welecome anyone into the folds of our politics. The exact oppisite are the republicans, the republicans seem to feel that only white christians should even be considered people. I would like to see them show me the line in the Bible that says "The black race, The Gays, and anyone that is not white should not be treated as human." One last thing before I sign off, in the bible Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem not an elephant.
When I dare to be powerful, to use my strength in the service of my God, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.
P.S. Please forgive any spelling/Gramar mistakes. I do have my weaknesses.
Interesting post. Thanks for commenting!
Hey. I just wanted to say that I love your site. By the way is there any way I could talk you into linking to my blog. I'm having trouble getting people to find it.
Sure. Feel free to reciprocate the link.
re: the antichrist, Karl Rove:
Wednesday 06 July 2005
The following letter is being circulated By Rep. John Conyers Jr. to other House Democrats for signatures. The letter will be sent to the White House on Thursday July 7th.
07 July 2005
The President
The White House
Washington, DC
Dear Mr. President:
We write in order to urge that you require your Deputy White House Chief of Staff, Karl Rove, to either come forward immediately to explain his role in the Valerie Plame matter or to resign from your Administration.
Notwithstanding whether Mr. Rove intentionally violated the law in leaking information concerning former CIA operative Valerie Plame, we believe it is not tenable to maintain Mr. Rove as one of your most important advisors unless he is willing to explain his central role in using the power and authority of your Administration to disseminate information regarding Ms. Plame and to undermine her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
We now know that e-mails recently turned over by Time, Inc. between writer Matthew Cooper and Time editors reveal that one of Mr. Cooper's principal sources in the Plame matter was Mr. Rove. This has been confirmed by Newsweek and two lawyers representing witnesses involved in the investigation. Mr. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, also has confirmed that Mr. Rove was interviewed by Mr. Cooper in connection with a possible article about Ms. Plame three or four days before Robert Novak wrote a column outing Ms. Plame as a CIA operative.
We also know that Mr. Rove told Chris Matthews that Ambassador Wilson's wife and her undercover status were "fair game." A White House source also appears to have previously acknowledged that Mr. Rove contacted Mr. Matthews and other journalists, indicating that "it was reasonable to discuss who sent Wilson to Niger."
The above facts appear to be directly inconsistent with previous statements by you and representatives of your Administration concerning leaking in general and the Plame case in particular. For example, on September 30, 2003, you stated "there's just too many leaks [in Washington]. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is." You also stated "I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business." On October 10, 2003, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan was asked if Mr. Rove or two other aides in your Administration had ever discussed the Plame matter with any reporter, and he stated he had spoken to Mr. Rove and the others and "they assured me that they were not involved in this."
Regardless of whether these actions violate the law - including specific laws against the disclosure of classified information as well as broader laws against obstruction of justice, the negligent distribution of defense information, and obligating reporting of press leaks to proper authorities - they seem to reveal a course of conduct designed to threaten and intimidate those who provide information critical of your Administration, such as Ambassador Wilson.
We hope you agree with us that such behavior should never be tolerated by any Administration. While it is acceptable for a private citizen to use every legal tool at his or her disposal to protect himself against legal liability, high-ranking members of your Administration who are involved in any effort to smear a private citizen or to disseminate information regarding a CIA operative should be expected to meet a far higher standard of ethical behavior and forthrightness. This is why we believe it is so important that Mr. Rove publicly and fully explain his role in this matter.
Sincerely,
I love that letter to rove
Post a Comment