Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NEWSWEEK: Matt Cooper's Source
Newsweek ^ | July 18 issue | Michael Isikoff

Posted on 07/10/2005 12:12:27 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-276 next last
To: cameroncrazy1984

Rove's biggest sin is that he's made a career of beating your party's brains in.

Once this "Spy Who Came In For the Vanity Fair Glamour Shot" nonsense blows over, he'll resume doing just that. And your party's operatives will continue to be reduced to misrepresenting themselves on political message boards and other worthwhile, highly effective (cough, cough) endeavors.


221 posted on 07/11/2005 7:53:37 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

"Rove's biggest sin, as far as his enemies are concerned, is that he got George W. Bush elected twice. That's it. That's why they're out to get him. Anyone who doesn't see that, as far as I'm concerned, is blind as a bat."

Right. Republicans don't sin, are never unethical and are only innocent victims of bad people. Not even CAPABLE of being unethical! God must have made them sinless and ancient democrats secretly removed that chapter from the bible. Anyone who believes THAT is blind as a bat, or too partisan to think straight.

Yeah, it's a "vast left wing conspiracy" spanning decades. No motive for Rove, huh? Must have been someone in the democrat camp, who didn't appreciate the CIA agent's husband questioning the BOGUS nukes from Africa story.

The jury is still out.

I don't like being lied to or manipulated, by anyone.

"Otherwise, spare me the Victim McCain for President committee's talking points."

If you go through my posts, you'll see I do not like McCain.
Not everyone is a democrat or republican robot. Some of us can think for ourselves.


222 posted on 07/11/2005 7:53:58 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: torchthemummy

"Are you on the same page in regards to the "dirty trick" Rove pulled in NY by calling "liberals" to the floor followed by Dems exscoriating Rove for his comments while at the same time not realizing they were actually admitting that they - Dems - were libs. Please."

I am referring to serious dirty tricks over a few decades. And saying democrats, half the people his President represents, wish to see troops get killed is a low blow. My brother is a democrat, and a "troop" and he doesn't want to see his comrades killed.

"If you want intellectually-dishonest-emotionally-bankrupt political maneuvers then Dems are your cup of tea."

I am an independent, and neither partisan robot party appeals to me.


223 posted on 07/11/2005 7:58:28 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

Comment #224 Removed by Moderator

To: followerofchrist
Right. Republicans don't sin, are never unethical and are only innocent victims of bad people. Not even CAPABLE of being unethical! God must have made them sinless and ancient democrats secretly removed that chapter from the bible. Anyone who believes THAT is blind as a bat, or too partisan to think straight.

Right. That remotely resembles anything I said.

I'll be around if you ever come up with that evidence that Rove was behind the McCain push polls.

225 posted on 07/11/2005 8:00:51 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: grondram

We will see, won't we? I am challenging the knee jerk "Karl is a victim" assumption here. If he is guilty, he needs to do hard time.

Don't even tell me that 1000 people here wouldn't jump on any democrat accused of the same thing.


226 posted on 07/11/2005 8:02:04 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: cameroncrazy1984
moderate independent

Euphemism for liberal democrat. Not a particularly original one, at that.

227 posted on 07/11/2005 8:14:52 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: cameroncrazy1984

"Well you failed, considering there was nothing in any of my posts that even suggested i was giddy, moronic, leftist or moonbat. I was merely asking questions about the process, the article and replying to another poster about Fitzgerald's background. I am definitely not leftist as I am an independent, and my questions were definitely legitimate."

That's right, and welcome, fellow independent. Stand your ground here. Expect attacks from people who go ballistic when you disagree or ask legitimate questions. I've endured it for quite some time. There are many reasonable people here, but they often send supportive private mail
instead of incurring the wrath of partisans.

Partisanship is a disease. They cannot apply the same standards to all. If a dem was cornered the way Rove was, they be a pack of pitt bulls. You know it and I know it, so do the posters who respond to your questions with personal attacks. You've questioned their ideology, their sacred cow (the "party") and that's enough to be branded a liberal.

"I do not believe in partisan politics. I believe in right versus wrong and justice prevailing. I believed so in 1997 during the clinton perjury thing, and I believe it now. Justice knows no politics. You have to respect that."

I respect that, but republicans are like democrats, they want to WIN know matter what the cost, even the soul of their party. They believe in morality when other people aren't practicing it, but that all goes out the window when one of their idols get caught with his pants down.

" support our troops, I support the war on terrorism, and I support a country that uses the Constitution as its foundation. I DO NOT support lying, cheating or criminal acts, and if that's what this is, I want justice to be swift and sure. I don't care who it is, I just want (as President Bush does) the leaker to be found, tried and punished to the fullest extent of the law."

Right, like Bush really wants Rove caught if he's guilty.

It doesn't matter if you support 99% of neo-con platform. They will attack you mercilessly for disagreeing on the 1%.
Don't try to use reason with a partisan. It won't work. Fanatics can't understand reason, and they are often more hostile to independents than they are democrats because they assume we would vote for them if the independents didn't exist.

WRONG.


228 posted on 07/11/2005 8:16:47 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: cameroncrazy1984

"No, Rove's biggest sin is that he got fired from George H.W. Bush's campagin for doing something very similar to what the special prosecuter is right now investigating."

Doesn't matter to partisans Cameron. It must have been a conspiracy, and irrational conspiracy, to avenge getting (shadily) republicans elected. The only sin a republican can comitt here is being a swing voter or voting to bring the tropps home. Doesn't matter if he's corrupt, dirty, in the pocket of big oil, a cheat, a drunk or a drug addict. Doesn't matter. They defend their own, regardless of character. The party doesn't have a conscience anymore. It's about winning and controlling other people's lives.


229 posted on 07/11/2005 8:22:58 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: cameroncrazy1984

Please elaborate on why Rive was fired by Bushie Seniora.


230 posted on 07/11/2005 8:23:43 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: followerofchrist

That was the best imitation of a DU screed I've seen all day.


231 posted on 07/11/2005 8:37:12 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

1. Why is it the journalistrix who's in the hoosegow and not the journalist? Could it be related to the likelihood of protection from a "shower sausaging" incident?

2. Why is the NY Times journalistrix who is in the hoosegow and the NY Times that will be doing the front page story on Mr. Rove?

3. Why are Newsweek, NY Times and Washington Post sounding off against Mr. Rove while Time, employer of Matt Cooper, is suspiciously silent on Mr. Rove?

Conspiracy or walking like a duck and talking like a duck?

232 posted on 07/11/2005 8:40:26 PM PDT by olde north church (What's the difference between Ted Kennedy and a mature, male walrus?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

"Once this "Spy Who Came In For the Vanity Fair Glamour Shot" nonsense blows over, he'll resume doing just that. And your party's operatives will continue to be reduced to misrepresenting themselves on political message boards and other worthwhile, highly effective (cough, cough) endeavors."

Congratulations! You said something the mob agrees with and repeats daily! How independent minded you are!

Why, when one disagrees with, or questions the "Party line" you are following, he must be called a democrat? Are you that blindly partisan to this point where all Americans support either tweedle dee or tweedle dum? There's only black and white, good and evil, like in fairy tales? If one disagreees with your solutions, they must be "for the other side?" Come on!

There are a few other parties out there, and FYI free thinkers still exist in America. We all get along when democrats are in office, but when independents apply the same standards to republicans, it's war of the words.


233 posted on 07/11/2005 8:45:00 PM PDT by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard; cameroncrazy1984; grondram
Indeed! But, if the trolling nontroller newbies are really just curious travellers to the right side of reality, may I suggest a visit to Powerline, for bits of sobering perspective such as this...

Case closed! Go back to the underground.

and while we're at it...


234 posted on 07/11/2005 8:48:33 PM PDT by Mr.Atos (http://mysandmen.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: followerofchrist

You keep finding new and inarticulate ways of saying the same thing, over and over and over. If can narrow it down to one or two coherent questions, you might get an answer.

BTW, how's the evidence on the Rove/McCain push poll accusation you made coming along?


235 posted on 07/11/2005 8:56:03 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: followerofchrist
We all get along when democrats are in office

I don't even know what to say to this...

236 posted on 07/11/2005 8:57:26 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos
"Andrea Mitchell was asked, on MSNBC, whether it was generally known to news people, before the hullabaloo, that Ms. Plame worked for the CIA. She answered, somewhat reluctantly, that it was. In the light of this, I don't understand the ensuing fuss."

The ensuing fuss is because the world wasn't supposed to find out that Joe's wife got him a mint-julip junket to Niger.

The Democrats used a political hack to discredit British intelligence findings, it didn't work against Bush, Rove got him re-elected in spite of their best efforts and they're throwing a hissy fit. Does that about sum it up?

237 posted on 07/11/2005 9:04:51 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

Comment #238 Removed by Moderator

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
Does that about sum it up?

Yep! That about does it.

239 posted on 07/11/2005 10:06:01 PM PDT by Mr.Atos (http://mysandmen.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: cameroncrazy1984
Also you didn't mention that a White House official blew the cover of a CIA agent in order to discredit the discreditor. What's that called?

It's called politics. Wilson went to Niger with the intention of discrediting the yellowcake report. His wife knew his reasons for wanting to go. So, she pulled some strings and got him the gig. And Joe went. He met a couple of dudes, had some tea and a few drinks, found nothing (exactly what he was looking for), came back and started calling Bush a liar to anyone who would listen. Then they both subsequently lied about who got Joe the Niger assignment (as last summer's Senate Intelligence Committe report clearly shows).

If Plame wanted to be treated like a CIA Agent, maybe she should have thought about that before using her position in the agency to set-up a campaign season political attack on behalf of John Kerry (who her husband donated generously to).

Sorry, but no matter how much you want it to be, the CIA isn't an arm of the DNC.

240 posted on 07/11/2005 11:16:37 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (You're either with us, or you're against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-276 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson