Democrats Demand Retraction From Rove

Hey Dog wassup? Here's a copy of an email that I sent to the jerk Schumer.

Message sent to the following recipients: Senator Schumer Message text follows: June 24, 2005 [recipient address was inserted here] [recipient name was inserted here], I'll tell you what senator. We'll call for Karl Rove to retract and apologize for his statements the day that the democrats censure Sen. Durbin for his! Sincerely, John J. Miller

Comparing America to the worst dictators in History is ok. Comparing America to Hitler is ok. But now democrats want someone to apologize over this.

I'll tell you what senator. We'll call for Karl Rove to retract and apologize for his statements the day that the democrats censure Sen. Durbin for his!

ummmm...Durbin did apologize. And Democrats said he was out of line. Karl Rove hasn't apologized, in fact, the White House backed him. Until yesterday, I wasn't aware that I wanted to give therapy to Bin Laden, or to indict victims. My family, which is about as liberal as it gets, was 100% behind Bush for Afghanistan. After 9/11, we were among the other 97% of Americans calling for Bin Laden's death. And we still hope Bin Laden is captured or killed. 9/11 was one of the worst, if not the worst day in American History, and in response, we threw aside politics, for once, and worked together to bring Bin Laden down. Unfortunately, many people now have forgotton that unity that got things done.

just another case of democratic dementia dog, they can say anything they want, but heaven forbid if YOU say something about them.

Comparing America to the worst dictators in History is ok. Comparing America to Hitler is ok. But now democrats want someone to apologize over this. I'll tell you what senator. We'll call for Karl Rove to retract and apologize for his statements the day that the democrats censure Sen. Durbin for his! ummmm...Durbin did apologize. And Democrats said he was out of line

If you consider Durbin's apology to be for real, then you need to seek counseling. What "democrats" said he was out of line?

Durbin did apologize

No, he did not. If you think that is an appology, then I have a bridger in Brooklyn to sell you!

"If I offended anyone" is not the same as "I was wrong to call them Nazis".

Learn the difference. You might be able to pass an english comprehension test if you do.

If you consider Durbin's apology to be for real, then you need to seek counseling. What "democrats" said he was out of line?

Dick Daily Jr. That is all.

This is just something to meant to draw attention away from Dean's incessant oral diarrhea. They think to themselves "Oh, my God, that's 20 times in a week he's made an ass out of himself. We MUST villify a Republican to give the press someone more enjoyable to browbeat!!"

They know the Rove thing will get more play, because Dean is a joke and everyone knows it, but people take Rove seriously; either as an influential part of the Bush team or a serious threat. Dean is a clown, but the press is going to be sympathetic to his party as the 'underdog' at this point.

Rove gives them someone to 'bring down'. Dean is already down.

Durbin was a complete moron and will hopefully not get reelected. His comments were insensitive and wrong.
Dean says stupid shit left and right. People have been all over him demanding he apologize and such.

Rove says something pretty damn dumb.

So, because Democrats do it so much, Republicans can get away with it once or twice? I think if the Republicans are going to demand apologies from Democrats, it should go the other way. Rove managed to lump the entire country left of center together in a very insulting way. I think he deserves to have his stupid remarks rubbed in his face.

The apology demand thing goes both ways, you can't play until the game turns against you then take your ball and go home.

What Rove said was true, what Dean and Durbin said wasn't. That's the difference.

Democrats have focused on blaming SOMEONE here for 9-11 since it happened. We have spent millions investigating and laying blame. Then, we hear that we should have known it would happen because of how we treat the poor Arabs. We should have known because we're all 'little eichman's' and fair game because we take part in a successful capitalist society.

Rove was right. The reaction of the Democratic party was sympathetic to the victims, but totally opportunistic dragging people in front of subcommittees trying to glue a target to someone's, anyone's head.

What Rove said was true, what Dean and Durbin said wasn't. That's the difference.

There is more proof of how liberals try to defend terrorists and blame America, than there is for any accusations they make.

As a Democrat, I was lumped into that group by Rove. A lot of Democrats I know feel like I do regarding 9/11, Afghanistan and the war in Iraq. We were lumped in with the opportunistic ones by Rove. It is people like us he needs to apologize to. It's as fair to say Democrats are Traitors as it is to say Republicans are Jesus Freaks. It may be true for some, it may even be true for some in power, but it is a pretty significant insult to everyone else.

Rove succeeded in insulting more than the idiots like Kennedy, Kerry and Dean. He insulted even those of us who are rational and reasonable in our opinions. Those of us who don't swallow the party line hook and all.

The Party is more than the clowns in D.C. they just happen to be in the spotlight right now.

It doesn't matter how many times Democrats screw up, how many stupid things they say, how many errors they make. That doesn't excuse bad behavior on the other side of the aisle.

That's like me saying "Well, I figured stealing that CD from the corner store was ok, because by comparison other people are shooting people in the streets... What I did is minor by comparison and hardly ever happens, so I should get a pass"

If you're going to get mad when the left insults republicans, don't be surprised, shocked, indignant, self-rightous when when they get mad when you insult them. You think you're right, they think they're right... When stuff like this happens, everyone's just a bunch of assholes.

If you're going to get mad when the left insults republicans, don't be surprised, shocked, indignant, self-rightous when when they get mad when you insult them. You think you're right, they think they're right... When stuff like this happens, everyone's just a bunch of assholes.

They go beyond insults. They degrade our soldiers, blame our country for everything they can think of, they provide support to our enemies (just look at al-jazeera and durbins remarks). There is a difference.

When Rove makes a comment like this now everybody gets "offended". This "outrage" is about as fake as the abu ghraib "outrage".

Zoomba: Do you consider yourself a Liberal? What Rove said was:

"liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

To me, that is the textbook definition of Liberal in this case. It has more to do with what the word Liberal means in and of itself, I think, than a class of people in the US. You have to admit that the goal of the Liberal in any situation is going to be different than the goal of the Conservative. That's why we have the difference to begin with.

I don't consider you a Liberal, Zoomba. Perhaps you lean toward the Liberal side on some opinions, but Liberals are defined by such for better or worse, and I don't think you allow yourself to be.

So, because Democrats do it so much, Republicans can get away with it once or twice? I think if the Republicans are going to demand apologies from Democrats, it should go the other way. Rove managed to lump the entire country left of center together in a very insulting way. I think he deserves to have his stupid remarks rubbed in his face. The apology demand thing goes both ways, you can't play until the game turns against you then take your ball and go home.

As I said on another thread. I will be the first to call for an appology when the left leadership does the same for the statements of Dean, Durbin, Reid, Pelosi, Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy and Byrd.

perhaps it is not "because democrats do it". Perhaps it is because they continue to do it, and do it and do it with impugnity. Lott was busted for less than what Durbin said, and the democrats did not even flick his wrist.

#12 by Zoomba Friday, June 24, 2005 As a Democrat,

Exactly wrong. he said Liberals. He did not mention democrats.

Zoomba, please compare the following statements:

"Guantanamo Bay is like the Gulags."
"Conservatives are like Nazis."
"Liberals want to be nicer to terrorists than conservatives do."

The third statement is much less extreme than the first two. Also, by being much less extreme, it actually falls into the realm of reasonable comparison. Finally, unlike the first two statements, the third is amply supported by public written and spoken opinion. Liberals really are on record, multiple times, as having the general attitude which Rove describes.

Not only are liberals making outrageous comparisons between conservatives and Nazis, but now they're also trying to make equallly outrageous comparisons between their own behavior and Rove's behavior.

The day Rove says that because liberals want to coddle terrorists, they're just like Saddam Hussein, that is the day he'll have something to apologize for.

Why? Because while liberals who want to coddle terrorists are misguided fools, that doesn't put them in the same league as megalomaniacal tyrants with a Hitler fetish and a knack for mass-murdering their own citizens. Even though Saddam Hussein also coddled terrorists.

You can't refute the Nazi comparison, because anybody nutty enough to make that comparison isn't going to listen to reason.

But I guarantee you, if the liberals were to make a reasonable case that they're just as tough--or tougher!--on terrorism than conservatives are, I promise you we conservatives will happily retract our opinion of your weaksauce ways, and welcome you with open arms in a spirit of bipartisan optimism.

just another case of someone on the left "SEEING" what they want to see, so they can piss and moan.

big difference between Liberal and democrat,

"ummmm...Durbin did apologize. And Democrats said he was out of line. Karl Rove hasn't apologized, in fact, the White House backed him"
Ha. Someone's been skimming the papers a little too quickly. Not that the papers were saying anything important.

#21 by Reiki-House Friday, June 24, 2005 "ummmm...Durbin did apologize. And Democrats said he was out of line. Karl Rove hasn't apologized, in fact, the White House backed him" Ha. Someone's been skimming the papers a little too quickly. Not that the papers were saying anything important.

Hey RH why don't you try doing a little lite reading becaues your suppositions are misguided at best!Because in all actuallity Durbin did NOT apologize! And just and FYI give me the names of those dems tahat hagecalled him to task, that is if you can.

Durbin did apologize No, he did not. If you think that is an appology, then I have a bridger in Brooklyn to sell you! "If I offended anyone" is not the same as "I was wrong to call them Nazis". Learn the difference. You might be able to pass an english comprehension test if you do.

What Rove said was true, what Dean and Durbin said wasn't. That's the difference. Democrats have focused on blaming SOMEONE here for 9-11 since it happened. We have spent millions investigating and laying blame. Then, we hear that we should have known it would happen because of how we treat the poor Arabs. We should have known because we're all 'little eichman's' and fair game because we take part in a successful capitalist society. Rove was right. The reaction of the Democratic party was sympathetic to the victims, but totally opportunistic dragging people in front of subcommittees trying to glue a target to someone's, anyone's head.

considering we're all sooooo much safer now than we were on 9/11/01 thanks in no small part to karl rove's unyielding single-minded campaign to decimate the enemy--those americans on the other side of the political divide--while the candidates for whom he battled so fiercely have prosecuted the real war with real terrorists far less effectively, perhaps he should be apologizing to the entire country for having the nerve to make such an arrogant, empty divisive statement.

in a perfect world, someone would put karl's fat lil ass in charge of catching bin laden.

oh, that's right. pretty difficult to get around in a limousine--even one with an outcall boy escort crew--way out in the tribal boonies along the afghan/pakistan border.

hmmm.....interesting, sounds like a tennis match....back and forth, back and forth......(can't stand tennis,more of a golf person myself)


--doc b

" considering we're all sooooo much safer now than we were on 9/11/01 thanks in no small part to karl rove's unyielding single-minded campaign to decimate the enemy-"

The lack of single-mindedness is the problem. In reality it has been a long, drawn-out, half-assed campaign to kill the enemy as long as we don't have to offend anyone by overt use of force. Much better to pacify them by giving them lots of soldiers to shoot at.

The lack of single-mindedness is the problem

more like a lack of substance (in several senses of the term), focus, historical perspective and, most of all, any kinda real plan. i'm gonna guess you're talking bout iraq, but things were going south before anyone hadda chance not to offend anyone there. nearly 4 years later, afghanistan is a long way from being stable (except, perhaps, in kabul) and there's still a significant taliban presence. if anyone shoulda been aware of the mistakes we made in walking away from afghanistan after the ussr imploded and also been determined not to repeat them, it shoulda been the very people who wound up pretty much doing the same thing again in 2002. we certainly haven't allowed bin laden to remain at large because we were worried bout offending anyone.

nor does that have anything to do with north korea's nukes.
or with iran's nukes.

as far as domestic security goes, checking passesngers' shoes before allowing them to board planes and confiscating lighters is certainly visible and aggravating as hell, but it's all show. i live less than a mile from about a square mile of fuel and chemical containers located a couple blocks away from the main channel of the biggest port on the west coast. despite all the money that's supposed to be spent bolstering security in the harbor, there's nobody available to investigate supposedly empty containers being returned to the port (something the longshoremen did until relatively recently) and there's nothing--literally nothing--available to stop a supertanker from plowing thru the outer breakwater and down the channel til it smacks into something at 30 knots (no brakes on ships) and sets off the whole tank farm.

the same thing on a slightly smaller scale--using 18-wheelers or trains--is possible just about anywhere on the continent. it's pitifully easy to gain access to chemical plants. nuclear facilities are hardly more secure than most banks.

i'm not even scratching the surface--and i'm sure you know that as well as anyone (actually i'd bet you're far more aware of the problem than 99% of the population, myself included).

rove is either delusional or he's convinced the rest of us are dumb as fuckin rocks.

if anyone shoulda been aware of the mistakes we made in walking away from afghanistan after the ussr imploded and also been determined not to repeat them, it shoulda been the very people who wound up pretty much doing the same thing again in 2002. we certainly haven't allowed bin laden to remain at large because we were worried bout offending anyone.

Kingbee

You do know that it was John Kerry that headed up a Sub-committee and hearings at the end of the USSR pull out, that was hunting down any CIA operations continuing in Afghanistan? These operations were conducted by CIA operatives that requested repeatedly assistance to support a pro-US Government there. But Kerry's committee effectively shut down these operations (i.e. helping bring the Taliban to power); just as he lead the committees hunting CIA operations in Central America after the communist had been crushed. These later South American operations were mostly influence missions to bring about democratic change. But of course Kerry's committees did not distinguish between the good operations and the by then concluded bad ones.

In Kerry’s great zeal to make a name for himself off the backs of the CIA (just as he did to the soldier’s of Vietnam), he has caused more international problems for the US then he wants to admit. He wants to point the finger of blame on the US for not doing anything, when he should be pointing to himself first.

Sorry for getting off topic here.