Karl Rove: Traitor?

While I agree with this, I would neither call him a centrist, nor would I believe he ran on anything other than a conservatiive platform. He talks one way and then does something else. I want to see the quote for that one... and I want to see it from his 2000 campaign as well. I would be on a certain portion of wealth, especially to get the books in balance and remove the debt we have incurred. What's interesting is that a republican congress refused to give Clinton such permission and derided his military activities in Kosovo as well as his attempts to kill OBL using missile strikes. But then with a Rep in charge it is a-okay?Heck Bush specifically addressed an Iraq War-type hypothetical in his first campaign and used it to differentiate himself from Gore, and democrats, by stating he would not engage in such campaigns and criticized Clinton and Gore for having done so.I sure remember that as I agreed and it is was one of the things which helped me decide I'd prefer Bush over Gore. Where did that guy go? Oh yeah, the democrats managed to switch Bush and the rest of the republican congress with clones on 911. Sorry but you missed one important part of the liberal side which he does not have and has lead to his great failures, trusting the people to be a part of gov't and taking care of them so that they can be a valid part of society and the gov't.Liberals do not just "trust big gov't", there is a purpose and he has none. It might be pointed out that liberal programs did in fact work and produced what they needed to for society. There were of course valid criticisms of how big they needed to be and the bureacracy behins them, but things didn't start getting worse until we threw the baby out with the bath water, and then simply piped back in the bath water. I love how it was a Rep idea until it started failing, and now its back to being a dem idea. Hey guess what Rand? Whether it was a democratic idea or not, it was a republican created and run organization. Any and all failures at handling problems were Rep based. Heck look at all of the emergency services. Who was doing the appointing? Who was running the show?Oh yeah, and as far as honesty goes, who appointed Brown who had no credentials for the job while stating he was going to improve emergency services, and then announced what a great job Brown was doing while a manmade disaster was going on because of Brown?

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Unfuckingbelievable! You have got to be kidding me randman. This may be one of the boldest piles of complete and utter bullshit you have ever posted here! I seem to recall a certain Democrat that suggested the idea of a "homeland security department" prior to 9/11, which the Republicans refused to discuss. After 9/11 however, the current version we have now was put into effect and that same Democrat (who spoke out against it) was voted out of office on the grounds that he was unpatriotic. Remind me again randman...how many limbs did that individual leave in Vietnam? How about his opponent...the Republican that won the election? Did he even serve...I think not. I can’t fucking believe that you would have the gall to write something like this. A new low...even for you.

Flies, your post makes some excellent points, but they're almost lost amongst the cursing.Try to put your outrage into your eloquence engine, not your obscenity machine.

---

Trust me.

AdminOmni:I know and I apologize. I was incredibly pissed-off while I was typing (stunned that he could say such a thing)...and believe it or not, I even cleaned it up a bit before I sent it. In all honesty, I thought I'd get suspended...but I didn't care. Randman's statement was, however, a complete heap of equine road-apples Thanks for the warning though...I'll learn to "play well with others" before responding to him again.

Are you trying to deny the dems were the first to push for the Dept of Homeland security?What's your beef? It's a factual claim, and as any conservative would have predicted, a larger beaurocracy is not necessarily more effective, and as we saw with Katrina, putting FEMA under Homeland Security did not work out well.Bigger is not better when it comes to government.

There's a reason for that. First, there was the uncanny timing of the Clinton war attacks that just happened to deflect off of impeachment proceedings and things like that. Secondly, the simple fact is the GOP was reluctant to get into nation-building prior to 911, but after 911, it was war and typically everyone defers to the president in such times, and Bush was persuaded by the neocons that democratizing Iraq could change the equation in the Middle East. You never heard "No Child Left Behind" and other campaign promises. We have to agree to disagree there because I think they do. 911 freaked them out because hardcore Islamicists like the nuclear scientist in Pakistan had the bomb, backed the Taliban, and they thought maybe some American cities would be taken out, and so they began a whole lot of overt and covert military ops to change the situation. Iraq is part of that strategy, right or wrong. It was a dem idea as was campaign finance reform despite McCain backing it as a Rep. Both have failed miserably, imo.

Randman, you don't even have a basic level of understanding about what liberals believe. I'll try to explain it to you.The liberal position is the one that distrusts ALL authority. That's right, ALL authority. (I'm very familiar with both the left and right, having belonged to both at variou points in my life). Liberals are much more distrustful of authority than conservatives.Now, here is the kicker. Liberals believe that some things are just not suitable for private enterprise. Healthcare being a good example. If I have the choice between a corporate bean counter deciding whether I live or die as opposed to an elected official that I HAVE THE POWER TO CHOOSE of course I'm going to go for the elected official.Some liberals, are very socialist.... but I think that's a minority position here in the states. I'm a pretty strong capitalist, but sometimes you have to admit that certain things work better as a govt. monopoly. Local power generation is a good example. Deregultion of the power industry is one of the bigeest disasters in modern history.We shouldn't try ot create markets in places they don't belong.

Are you completely incapable of reading and understanding a sentence? My beef is when people such as yourself try to, AS ALWAYS, blame the Democrats. Who's in charge randman? Last I checked, the Republicans were pretty much running the show, so if you want to blame someone for the fiasco of "homeland Security and FEMA"...well...you figure it out. I'm sorry, which party is it again that has increased the size of the Government? Have you seen the budget submitted by this administration? Cuts to anything having to do with the poor and education, while hundreds of billions to the pentagon and homeland security.

You are simply incredible randman. I'm curious, are you able to keep a straight face when you type this stuff, or do you just burst out in laughter? I mean seriously...Clinton attacked Kosovo to deflect attention away from impeachment hearings but the Republicans weren't gonna be fall for that ole trick? You're priceless, you know it.

??? Are you kidding me? Find me the timeline, and let me know how he engineered these actions to correspond with the actions of foreign national leaders opposed to the US. I mean its not like he just up and did something in a vaccuum. So you admit changes were made and he did reverse his campaign promises. Hey 911 affected me too. You know what I didn't do? Start believing neocon rhetoric and reverse my stance on how military is best used. Let's pretend I didn't. Please show how and where Bush ran on big gov't as the answer to national problems. No we won't. I explained a difference and you didn't even try to address it. In order for us to agree to disagree we must agree on the evidence and the fact that it is not definitive. Again, that doesn't answer the issue at all. Great so the reason they betrayed their values and promises is because they didn't know how to handle a crisis. That still means that they betrayed their values and campaign promises. Correct me if I'm wrong but the executive and legislative branches have been locked up by Reps since 2000. Whether the concept of DHS originated with a dem or not, it was advanced and put into place and mismanaged by Reps.Really, Reps can't blame the dems for anything that has happened since gaining full control of the gov't. If they used "dem" ideas, that just means they are also "rep" ideas.Side note, while I hated the name for DHS I still think it was a good idea to revamp and centralize intelligence and emergency services. How Bush and Co handled it was a majorclusterfuck from the get go... but that's the same for every other thing they've put their hands on, and why should that be any different?

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Libby: Bush himself authorized leak on IraqAnyone surprised by this is retarded.

---

"We had survived to turn on the History Channel
And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
You're what happens when two substances collide
And by all accounts you really should have died."
-Andrew Bird

I don't know; who'd of thought that GWB was even too stupid to understand the concept of plausible deniability?

---

"Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure."
-- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)

Sorry Dan, its not real until Fox carries the story. Not even thinkable. I will be (pleasantly) surprised if Fox actually runs and supports the story.What's the sound of millions of people waking up all at once?

---

holmes
"Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age." (Lovecraft)

seek and ye shall find

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yeah but... ... my guess is the Tal-heads will stick with that sentence.

---

holmes
"Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age." (Lovecraft)