Broken Troll, Zotgate!

Boston Globe ^ | 01/22/2004 | Charlie Savage

[Elliott Jackalope]

"We are in a FIGHT with the leftist in this country. This is not a GAME."

So if they fight dirty, we fight dirty. If they cheat, we cheat. That's all fine and dandy, but when the day comes when we want to rally undecided and independant voters to our cause, and they reply "you're just as bad as the other guys", that we will have only ourselves to blame.

[r135rr]

for all the good it did the republicans....what would have happened if we didnt have the files...doesnt seem to me we've
done very good getting our judges approved anyway....

[Elliott Jackalope]

The Democrats are Americans, and they are citizens of the same country as we are. Whether we agree with them or not, they are entitled to the benefits of rule of law, and furthermore we should engage them with a sense of fair play. If they choose to fight dirty then that is their choice, but that does not mean that we have to lower ourselves to that level.

Al-Queda is a terrorist organization bent on attacking us at every opportunity. We are in a state of war with them. That is a whole different ballgame, quite frankly your analogy is deeply flawed and I really can't believe you even made that argument.

[ShandaLear]

Does this mean if I go into my teenager's room and accidently stumble upon a baggie of pot, I don't have the right to confront him about it?

[Fresh Wind]

I know the pair who taped Newt's strategy session never got nailed for anything.

This is not exactly true. The couple who just happened to have cell phone intercept equipment and a tape recorder in their car as they were doing their shopping were each fined something like $500.00. The scumbag deluxe, Baghdad Jim McDermott, got away with no apparent penalty, as did the staffers at the New York Slimes who were responsible for publishing the story.

[Jotmo]

So if they fight dirty, we fight dirty. If they cheat, we cheat.

Where the h*ll did I say that? Who said anything about cheating? What the heck are you talking about?

Read what I'm writing NOT what you want it to say.

Taking advantage of an opponents mistake, provided it's within the rules, is NOT "fighting dirty". It's called "PLAYING TO WIN".

If no rules were broken, there's nothing wrong with it. In this case. I'm am NOT trying to say that if it's legal, it's moral. I fully understand that many things that are legal are very wrong indeed. So don't bother trying to throw that kind misrepresentation of what I said at me.

What you don't seem to see is that we are in a fight here, and you want to treat it as if it's some sort of gentleman's game.

WAKE UP. ITS A FIGHT. A nonviolent political one, but still a FIGHT.

The biggest problem with the Republican leadership is that they don't see this either. They won't take the fight to the Dem's, they want to play nice and get along. Meanwhile the Liberals are hitting hard ever chance they get and laughing their butts off at our "polite" behavior.

This attitude will RUIN us. Until we start treating this contest of philosophies like a fight we will continue to get our butts kicked by those who do.

[Elliott Jackalope]

Yeah, we're really getting our butts kicked. That's why Republicans control the House, the Senate and the Presidency. Boy, what a beating we're taking at the hand of the liberals! And look at the crop of first rate leaders the Democrats are running in this election! Wow, those are really effective campaigners, aren't they? And just look at all of the people who have left the Republican party to join with the Democrats! There must be, oh, about zero, as compared to the dozen or so who have left the Democratic party to run or serve as Republicans in the last three years.

I submit that the Clinton era hurt the Democrats, and hurt them badly. The country got to see the Clintonistas play their dirty games, and a lot of people who used to be supporters of the Democratic party either switched sides or withdrew their support. That's because people got to see too many dirty tricks done too many times to too many opponents of the Clinton administration, and they got tired of it.

Yes, we are in a fight. We need to fight hard, and fight well. But we do not need to fight dirty. I believe that if you go too far in the name of "playing to win", you'll end up losing in the long run.

[OldFriend]

By now it must be clear that the democrats have no interest in doing America's business but only desire to thwart the republicans no matter the damage to our national security.

[gubamyster]

Trolling through hundreds of memos, they were able to read talking points and accounts of private meetings discussing which judicial nominees Democrats would fight -- and with what tactics.

It's kind of sad that the Republicans have the Dem's game plan & still cannot outmaneuver the Dems to even get a hearing on judicial nominees.

[tubebender]

Are you on the Secret Zot Ping List and how long do I have to be here before I qualify? I must admit I had the perverse pleasure to be the first to press the button one time... : o )

[Elliott Jackalope]

Well said. As I noted above, dirty tricks like the whole FBI file scandal, the Vince Foster scandal, and the whole "Clinton Machine" that routinely dumped dirt on and discredited anyone who accused President Clinton of sexual misconduct cost the Democratic party a lot of political capital, as evidenced by fact that the Republicans currently control the House, the Senate and the Presidency.

Again, we need to fight hard, and fight well. Let's leave the fighting dirty to the other guys.

[Hot Tabasco]

The proper thing to have done would be to tell the Dems that they had left their data open to the world, and that they should do something to secure it

I did but they banned me from their site and called me a pubbie troll!!! Then when I tried to explain to them that I was a Deaniac they somehow got ahold of all my credit card info and started subscriptions to all kinds of porno sites......

[Jeff Gordon]

Republicans should have had no problem with the Clintons reading Republicans' FBI files.

If said files were left on a table in a public place - not by accident, but as a standard way of doing busines - then, yes Rublicans and everyone else should have no problem with people who read the stuff. If someone has a problem with such access they should put the files is a place that is secure from public access.

Let me ask you this...

Assume there was a certain well know and sometimes controversial female Freeper who has pictures on her Freeper home page. Assume that by going to the URL of that picture you could branch out and look at the entire web site with an ordinary browser and not using any hacking techniques. Would it be wrong to go exploring though this public access to a published web site and learn all sorts of steamy details about that Freeper. If I gave you the name of the Freeper and the URL, would you go take a look?

[Jeff Gordon]

PS: Don't ask because I am not going to tell.... anyone.

[Jeff Gordon]

Does this mean if I go into my teenager's room and accidently stumble upon a baggie of pot, I don't have the right to confront him about it?

I have no idea how you managed to derive that conclusion from what I said. If the Republicans stumbled across a crime while looking at a publicly available democrat's web site they surely have the right if not the duty to report that crime.

[Jotmo]

Your definition of "fighting dirty" is far different from mine.

I've said more than once that as long as no rules are broken it's fair game, in this situation. And you have consistently misrepresented my position as advocating "cheating, dirty tricks, the ends justify the means" and so forth. That is not an adequate assessment of my position and no one who actually read my posts could think so.

The number of Representatives in congress with an "R" after their name is a poor indication of "winning" the culture war in case you haven't noticed. Surly not when those Representatives are acting more and more like Democrats all the time. The Republicans are moving to the left. If you cant see that ...well, what can I say? I do not define that as winning. I call it "surrendering".

I fight to win. You seem more concerned with making sure the opposition respects us weather we're winning or not.

I don't care if they respect us in the morning. I want their ideas and agenda CRUSHED. The will not like it. And they will NEVER respect us no matter how polite and respectfully we are.

[Jotmo]

So true!

[FormerLib]

While the Demonrats may not use the same tactics as al-Qaeda, they are just as bent on destroying what we hold dear in this nation.

If, in our battles with them, they leave their dirty laundry out for all and sundry to see what they are attempting to conceal, it is the duty of every patriotic American to help bring this deceit into the light of day.

The old adage about "gentlemen do not read other gentlemen's mail" went the way of the dodo around 1933. Attempting to play by some outmoded standard of "fairness" which our opponents would never consider extending to us is a recipe for disaster and failure. Excuse us if we reject the suggestion.

Besides, any day you tick off a liberal is a good day!

[FormerLib]

...then Republicans should have had no problem with the Clintons reading Republicans' FBI files.

Wrong, unauthorized possession of one of those files is a felony. I believe Chuck Colson went to prison for reading a single one. How many years did Hillary get?