Karl Rove's latest attempt to re-write the history

Olbermann and Huffington: Rove Launches Attacks on History, the Truth [VIDEO]

Keith and Arianna analyze and ridicule Karl Rove's latest attempt to re-write the history of the origins of the Iraq War. "This the work of a shameless and perhaps soulless political animal," says Huffington.



Karl Rove recently had the nerve to go on The Charlie Rose Show and claim that one of the "untold stories" about the war was that Bush administration didn't want to vote about the war in the fall of 2002 because he thought it would be too politicized! Has Karl Rove ever wanted to not politicize anything!? Nevermind, that this is entirely untold because it's entirely untrue, the more interesting question is why is Rove still saying this easily refutable bull**** and what does he hope to gain from it? Check out the video to your right to see what Arianna Huffington and Keith Olbermann think.

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=...gSBDqbKoI2y7Ji%2BqvG
Original Post
Just because it was shown on Keith Olberman's show does not mean it is commentary.
I watched the interview with Rose. I heard with my own ears Karl Rove say that, and in addition he also said that it was the Democrats that wanted to start that war.
You can defend the man all you want, but I know what I heard him say. He is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
Just because it was shown on Keith Olberman's show does not mean it is commentary.
I watched the interview with Rose. I heard with my own ears Karl Rove say that, and in addition he also said that it was the Democrats that wanted to start that war.
You can defend the man all you want, but I know what I heard him say. He is a liar, and the truth is not in him.



Well. They have their own kind of truth. I believe it's mostly due to the fact that the real truth always has a liberal bias! Wink
quote:
Originally posted by w_z:
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
Just because it was shown on Keith Olberman's show does not mean it is commentary.
I watched the interview with Rose. I heard with my own ears Karl Rove say that, and in addition he also said that it was the Democrats that wanted to start that war.
You can defend the man all you want, but I know what I heard him say. He is a liar, and the truth is not in him.



Well. They have their own kind of truth. I believe it's mostly due to the fact that the real truth always has a liberal bias! Wink


I'm not too sure what you mean by that. However, it does bring to mind the words of "Give 'Em Hell " Harry Truman , who when asked about that nickname said "I don't give 'em hell, I just give them the truth and the Republicans think it's hell". Could be you are correct, truth just naturally goes against the Republican agenda, and therefore they consider it to be liberal biased.
Skymaster, for your edification and future reference, Webster defines Fascism:
quote:

fas·cism Listen to the pronunciation of fascism
Pronunciation:
\ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date:
1921

1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>
— fas·cist Listen to the pronunciation of fascist \-shist also -sist\ noun or adjective often capitalized
— fas·cis·tic Listen to the pronunciation of fascistic \fa-ˈshis-tik also -ˈsis-\ adjective often capitalized
— fas·cis·ti·cal·ly Listen to the pronunciation of fascistically \-ti-k(ə-)lē\ adverb often capitalized
And excellman uses the quotation at the ende of every post through a mechanism on this forum that enables it. He is right, and so was Sinclair Lewis.

The three historic Fascist Governments, Germany, Italy and Spain were OFFICIALLY Christian. In the 15th Century Spain expelled two Religions, Islam, and Jeudaism. In the 20th Century Germany went further, it exterminated Jews, other non Christians, and Liberals.

On the Rose interview of Karl Rove. Rove's lies and distortions were spectacular. So egregious as to reach the level of incredible. If anything surprised me, it was the self control that Rose demonstrated as the interview progressed. Rove made totally unsubstiantiated assertions, and Rose did not stand up and beat the man to death. I am not sure I could have been as restrained.
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:
You just described all democrats in your definition of fascism.

And by the way I know what it means but your buddy excelman does not.


Did I now, Mr. Skymaster? (the Mr, is out of respect and is a Mr, not an Ms, because Skymaster is masculine form.) Was it a Democrats that insisted on being allowed to torture prisoners? Do Democrats seek to suspend Habeas Corpus? Are the Democrats denying defendants the right to know who their accusers are? Is it the radical Left that is trying to force compliance with the Commandment that we remember the Sabbath Day and Keep it Holy? Is it Democrats who Insist that only the God of Abraham is worth of worship? Name me a Democrat who has said that everyone must wear religious identification, or that "Harry Potter" must be removed from the Library?
Skymaster, you denigrate yourself with your own words, and accuse others of insulting you.
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:
Yes you did karl.

When did a Republican insist on the torture of prisoners and define torture for us. When did anybody seek to suspend habeas corpus? Your other questions are so stupid they had to come from the looney left. You go to these web sites and believe all these crazy things.

I guess thats a liberal for you. If its bad news about republicans it must be true.



Hey **** for brains! Why don't you go and get yourself at least a 6th grade education. And after you do, then come back and join us. Otherwise STFU! Your posts are nothing but boring worthless insults and offer no insight whatsoever. Your ignorant rants aren't helping your side at all. Whatever side that is.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by skymaster:
You are a typical liberal. When people don't agree with your ideas you lash out. Why don't you stfu twice over. I guess as liberals you don't feel I have freedom of speech.[QUOTE]


Ooooh! Spoken like a true scholar.

First, I've seen no ideas from you. And second, the only speech I've heard coming from you is coming out of your bunghole. But you're free to **** it out!
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:
Yes you did karl.

When did a Republican insist on the torture of prisoners and define torture for us. When did anybody seek to suspend habeas corpus? Your other questions are so stupid they had to come from the looney left. You go to these web sites and believe all these crazy things.

I guess thats a liberal for you. If its bad news about republicans it must be true.
Skymaster, (capital for the first word of a sentence) The most recent example was the confirmation hearing for our new Attorney General. He has the same problem you do. He insists that it is not torture unless the President says it is torture. The President, Vice President, Two former and the present, Attorney Generals have not only excused torture, they have authorized it. This information comes from several sources, including televised statements made by all the above named. It has also been widely reported in the Press and on television. Even his unholiness Rush "OxyContin" Limbaugh has said that torture is used by people acting on behalf of the United States with the authority of the President and Attorney General.
quote:
Originally posted by Karl Leuba:
The three historic Fascist Governments, Germany, ... In the 20th Century Germany went further, it exterminated ... Liberals.


You say that like it's a bad thing. I guess if our Government had been as fascist as you've already said, you would either be incredibly brave for your rants, or incredibly stupid. I'm going with the latter.

quote:
On the Rose interview of Karl Rove... I am not sure I could have been as restrained.


I've not known a liberal yet who was anything more than a parlor pink when it came to physical violence. Except in crowds. Usually they want someone else doing their fighting for them, and then turn them out afterwards.
quote:
Originally posted by Karl Leuba:
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:
Yes you did karl.

When did a Republican insist on the torture of prisoners and define torture for us. When did anybody seek to suspend habeas corpus? Your other questions are so stupid they had to come from the looney left. You go to these web sites and believe all these crazy things.

I guess thats a liberal for you. If its bad news about republicans it must be true.
Skymaster, (capital for the first word of a sentence) The most recent example was the confirmation hearing for our new Attorney General. He has the same problem you do. He insists that it is not torture unless the President says it is torture. The President, Vice President, Two former and the present, Attorney Generals have not only excused torture, they have authorized it. This information comes from several sources, including televised statements made by all the above named. It has also been widely reported in the Press and on television. Even his unholiness Rush "OxyContin" Limbaugh has said that torture is used by people acting on behalf of the United States with the authority of the President and Attorney General.


Everyone complains about "torture" in obtaining information from terrorist. We are not fighting a "tradional" adversary that believes in compassion but rather a demon possessed group that cuts heads off and post on the internet. They deal in terror so should we. Someone has to have gut enough to deal with these people on their own terms. They use our beliefs and passive culture against us. It would make me happy to see the terrorist lowered an inch a minute into a tub of boiling water to get information that would save American lives. I don't think they would have to go beyond the ankles to get the information. I for one am tired of people crying about mistreating these people while we keep loosing our kids in a piece of crap land where we're so hated. I'd be interested in knowing how many are against using the means necessary to obtain information from these people or are we just hearing from all the pacifist.
Torture this, torture that. Rubbish.

Real torture is useless in obtaining intelligence information. You can beat a person to death and he will tell you anything you want to hear to make the pain stop. You simply have no confidence in the information you beat out of a prisoner.

The torture the featherheads of the left continues to talk about amounts to psychological dislocation without permanent physical harm. Dislocation of the prisoner from his fellows, by isolation to isolation from everything else by sensory deprivation, puts the prisoner into a tremendously vulnerable position, during which useful intelligence information (as he knows it) may be elicited. It is likely that the lack of successful attacks on American soil has been the direct or indirect use of this method, or from some of the other methods the leftards object to. So why do they object? My guess is that a few hundred or few thousand dead Americans are a small price to pay for their principles.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×