« Britney Spears Wants To Recreate Demi Moore Nude Cover | Main | Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ »

Speaking truth to those out of power

Last night, in the comments section of my posting about the Kelo decision, "neil" whined that he couldn't comment on Paul's posting covering Karl Rove's speech in New York.

I sincerely wanted to discuss Rove's speech, but I'm short on time this morning and I think I sprained my essay muscles last night. Besides, I can't think of a thing to say about Rove's speech that hasn't been said better by Captain Ed or, especially, by Patrick Ruffini. And political advisor Karl Rove's words certainly pale in comparison to Democratic National Committee Chairman (freely-elected titular head of the party) Howard Dean's remarks, thoroughly assembled by Lily and Vince.

Howard Dean is, indeed, the gift that keeps on giving...

The part of my mind that likes literary and Biblical allusions wants me to say something about motes and beams and eyes, but I can't recall the exact phrasing... perhaps there's another phrase that might suffice, involving stones and glass houses?


Comments (28)

I thought it went "People w... (Below threshold)
fatman:

I thought it went "People who live in stone houses shouldn't throw glasses."

(Sorry. Lack of sleep. I'll go to bed now.)

Reading neil's comment has ... (Below threshold)
Mike:

Reading neil's comment has me scratching my head at how the hell he came up with that tripe. I suggest neil actually read or listen to what Rove actually said and then read the many examples cited by others proving what Rove said, mainly the MoveOn.org restraint petition among others.

Your way off base here neil, but keep it up, I like when the liberals highlight their inadequacies and misunderstandings in the war on terror.

Can you believe those frikk... (Below threshold)
neil:

Can you believe those frikken cowards and traitors at kos had the insolence to say this...they damn well need therapy if they believe this BS...

Democrats
Believe capturing the person primarily responsible for the attack should be a top priority.

Republicans
It's been four years, and Osama bin Laden is still free, even though Bush's CIA chief says he knows where he is.

Democrats
Investigate the intelligence failures that led to 9/11.

Republicans
Do everything in their power to block the 9/11 Commission from doing its work.

Democrats
Propose creating the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans
Push tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

Democrats
Believe we should have stayed the course in Afghanistan, not allowing the Taliban to resurge, the warlords to take power, and the opium trade to skyrocket.

Republicans
Ignore Afghanistan as the situation worsens.

Democrats
Believe that we should be honest with our troops about the reasons we go to war, give them everything they need to be safe, and make sure we go in with an exit plan.

Republicans
Manipulate intelligence to trump up reasons to go to war, don't give our troops the support they need, constantly mislead the public about the direction the war is going, and fail to make an exit plan. And turn Iraq into the ultimate terrorist training ground.

I guess Rove is right. Cons... (Below threshold)
frameone:

I guess Rove is right. Conservative did start preparing for war after Sept, 11. They are started blogs to argue about why they shouldn't have to fight.

Rove owes an apology to every Democrat currently serving in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Hey frameone,Rove ... (Below threshold)
Mike:

Hey frameone,

Rove said liberals, not democrats. The fact that you equate the two is your problem.

neil, your inability to see that you are proving what Rove said is astounding.

"Rove said liberals, not de... (Below threshold)
frameone:

"Rove said liberals, not democrats. The fact that you equate the two is your problem."

Hey Mike I guess that means Rove wasn't talking about Republicans either when he said "Conservatives prepared for war." Maybe you guys should start sorting out the conservatives from the Republicans so we all know which side you're on. And if that IS how we are supposed to take Rove's comments, could you all now please refrain from referring to Democrats as liberals? Afterall, even Karl Rove says there's a distinction to be made between Democrats and liberals.

Unless of course your comments are yet another indication of how far "conservatives" will go to destroy all sense of truth or meaning, starting with the language itself.

Of course Rove still owes a... (Below threshold)
frameone:

Of course Rove still owes an apology to all the liberals now serving in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Why does Karl Rove owe an a... (Below threshold)

Why does Karl Rove owe an apology to the Democrats fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq?

If they support those wars, obviously Karl Rove was not talking about them.

If they oppose those wars - why did they sign up?

Jay Tea writes: I... (Below threshold)
s9:

Jay Tea writes: I sincerely wanted to discuss Rove's speech, but I'm short on time this morning and I think I sprained my essay muscles last night. Besides, I can't think of a thing to say about Rove's speech that hasn't been said better by...

Funny... I have basically the same reaction. From my perspective, it isn't really all that interesting that Rove said the "liberal" half of the country hates Americans and wants them to die horribly. What's a lot more interesting is the way guys like Paul react to this bit of red meat.

Congratulations to you for resisting the urge to pile on.

"Why does Karl Rove owe an ... (Below threshold)
frameone:

"Why does Karl Rove owe an apology to the Democrats fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq? If they support those wars, obviously Karl Rove was not talking about them."

Obvious? Really? I didn't hear any qualifications from Rove. Of course, if this is the case, I'm sure you'll be glad to give Dick Durbin the benefit of the doubt as well and admit that he was only referring to those soldiers who tortured prisoners, not "our troops" in general. I'm sure you'd be willing to agree to that right?

Al Jazeera now broadcast... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Al Jazeera now broadcasts to the region the words of Senator Durbin, certainly putting America's men and women in uniform in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

Good thing no more needs to be said. I was wondering what my motives were, now I know: For all our soldiers to die horribly and for the terrorists to win. That clears things up.

Oh I absolutely agree that ... (Below threshold)

Oh I absolutely agree that Dick Durbin only meant the soldiers at Gitmo and not all of our troops.

And guess what? Durbin slandered them with grotesque lies.

Durbin should be censured as well.

Hey Mike I guess that me... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Hey Mike I guess that means Rove wasn't talking about Republicans either when he said "Conservatives prepared for war."

Actually I don't think he was. I am pretty certain he is more than happy to have Zell Miller and similar on his team (enough that Zell got the main prime time speaking slot).

I think when he said conservative he meant conservative and liberal when he said liberal.

And when you consider the speech was given at a conservative function and the topic was about the state of liberalism, his comments are pretty much in context and supported (he even qualified what a liberal was, when he mentioned moveon.org and those with similar positions in his speech).

Gee just like a liberal demand an apology for telling the truth about you. Instead of demanding apologies, maybe you shoudl instead get out and say what your position is, and marinalize the likes of moveon.org, Soros and Dean.

Nice try wingnuts, but you ... (Below threshold)
Cain:

Nice try wingnuts, but you and Rove can't distract us from the quaqmire in Iraq, our destroyed economy and the soon-to-be impeached liar-in-chief:

http://mattstover.blogspot.com/2005/06/reprinted-without-commentary-from.html

Those who are not blinded by Jeebus chickenhaws and the far right message machine should read avove.

s9, I see you're still refu... (Below threshold)

s9, I see you're still refusing to admit lying about me in public. Until you are willing to admit that you repeatedly lied about me, I have nothing to say to you and you have absolutely no business saying anything at all about me. What little credibility you may have had once had is shot. Once you come clean and acknowledge your lies, then we can discuss other matters.

I am willing to wait a long time to get justice, s9... but my patience is far from infinite.

J.

Reading the goofball's comm... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Reading the goofball's comments just confirms for me that closing comments is a wise move.

And Jay,
I missed what s9 did but just ban the asshole and go on with your life.

[Good grief, I can't seem t... (Below threshold)
s9:

[Good grief, I can't seem to post to the old thread Jay Tea links where he says I lied about him. Okay..., I'll post a response here.]

Jay Tea writes: That's a damnable lie. I don't drink at all. Never have -- medical conditions. I've never in my life even had a mild buzz. And although there are many times I could really stand to get stinking, fall-down drunk, I am a complete, 100% teetotaler.

I never said you were a drinker. I merely pointed out that the personal sacrifices you, so far, seem to have been willing to make in contributing to America's war effort against terrorism is to make sure you are safely posted far in the Rear guarding the Strategic Beer Reserve. In case any of those evil Islamofascists fall off the wagon while they're passing through...

Jay Tea continues: And you've lied about me before. You criticized me for not posting under a pseudonym, and you said I have an advertising supported website. All are demonstrably false, and you've yet to apologize for any of these.

How was my criticism about your not posting under a pseudonym (which, I confess, I don't remember, but that doesn't mean I didn't do it) amount to a lie about you? Is Jay Tea a pseudonym? I did not know that until now.

And, um— dude, you're an editor at Wizbang!, which as I can clearly see in the window I am typing in right now, carries advertisements. One of your sponsors is currently trying to sell me on the idea of some kind of DVD rental kiosk thing.

If those two things really are "demonstrably false," then well— I guess I'll owe you an apology when you demonstrate they're false.

Is there anything else I can do for you on this subject?

Paul writes: I mi... (Below threshold)
s9:

Paul writes: I missed what s9 did but just ban the asshole and go on with your life.

Okay. So now Paul has finally resorted to calling me an "asshole" and calling for me to be silenced. You don't need to do anything quite so drastic, though— have you considered simply telling me politely that my contributions in the comments section at Wizbang! are no longer welcome?

If serious criticism is officially off-topic here and comments are only welcome from fawning sycophants, then I would certainly leave of my own initiative and never come back. I wouldn't want to mess up the pretty rock garden you guys are cultivating here...

"And when you consider the ... (Below threshold)
frameone:

"And when you consider the speech was given at a conservative function and the topic was about the state of liberalism, his comments are pretty much in context and supported."

See, here's an interesting point to note. Why are conservative holding forums to discuss the state of liberalism? Obviously, the conservatives need a scape goat for the failed policies of the President they supported. The campaign is on to smear fellow Americans for Bush's failure in Iraq, Afghanistan, the economy, the environment, Social Security, education etc, etc. I can hear the strategy now. "We're down in all the polls again, better gin up another enemy and throw out some red meat." Beautiful.

And I'm sorry if Rove didn't mean the Democratic party when he said "liberal" why did he insist on lumping in Howard Dean later on when he mentioned MOveOn and Michael Moore? Dean supported the war in Afghanistan, he supported the Homeland Security Department, he supported the first Gulf War. Care to comment on this neat little slip on Rove's part?

Let's face it, Bush is tanking in all the polls on everyone of his major policy initiatives, domestic and foreign and the Republicans and their neo-con, religious right keepers need to find some scapegoats. Bush is serially incapable of taking responsibility for his actions.

As to Pundits comments, Durbin quoted an FBI interrogator reporting what he saw with his own eyes: Prisoners chained in fetal positions for 18-20 hours at a time without food or water, deprived of sleep, mentally abused, and allowed to defecate on themselves. Pundit, are you accussing this FBI interrogator of lying? Is that what you're saying, the FBI is trying to smear US soldiers? Because if US soldiers are doing this kind of thing on their own they ought to be ashamed of themselves and they should face the consequences. BUt, fo course, they were doing it so they were not being smeared by the FBI or Durbin. The question now remains, why would so many individual soldiers in different places all be stepping over the line to do the same things to prisoners? What would be a reasonable assumption given that we know the Bush administration had lawyers looking for loopholes in the Geneva Conventions and that Rumsfled had approved a list of 'aggressive interogation" techniques, many of which are considered torture?

Bringing these things to light is not "blaming America" or taking "joy" in our own country's disgrace. It's saying enough is enough. This country stands for something better than the kind of behavior reported by the FBI interrogator that Durbin quoted. What Rove did was blame America. Rove pointed at a large swath of his fellow citizens and said we were traitors. That's blaming America, that's divisive politics. Trying to get this administration to stop trampling the great ideals of this country, that's patriotism.

s9 -- You gotta re... (Below threshold)
frameone:

s9 --

You gotta rember to treat Jay Tea with kid gloves. It's fairly obvious that he has zero self-esteem.

Yup, conservatives care abo... (Below threshold)
frameone:

Yup, conservatives care about our troops.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301888.html

"Joseph A. Violante, legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, said Perlin's testimony yesterday confirms the veterans' assessment that the administration is "shortchanging veterans."

The Bush administration and House Republicans have been the main focus of anger among veterans organizations.

Their "policies are inconsistent with a nation at war," said Steve Robertson, legislative director of the American Legion. They violate the basic military value of "an army of one, teamwork, taking care of each other," he said.

The administration and Congress, Robertson said, are promoting policies that "subdivide veterans into little groups, the ones that 'deserve' and the ones who 'don't deserve.' "

Veterans groups are particularly angry with Buyer, who was specially chosen by the House leadership to chair the House Veterans Affairs Committee to keep spending down. Buyer was selected to replace Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.), who had alienated House leaders by pushing for high levels of spending on veterans programs.

Buyer recently sparked new controversy in an interview published by the American Legion Magazine in which he said the department should concentrate on serving a "core constituency," and he disputed assertions that "all veterans are veterans and all veterans should be treated the same."

The Indiana Republican has defended the House's fiscal 2006 spending levels for veterans, contending that VA health care would actually grow by $1.6 billion under the House legislation.

American Legion National Commander Thomas P. Cadmus countered that nearly $1 billion of the $1.6 billion increase would be achieved by cutting other medical accounts: $533 million from the medical administration account, $417 million from medical facilities and $9 million from medical and prosthetics research."

frame, I hate to be so cras... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

frame, I hate to be so crass as to use REALITY to challenge your statements, but I see it is absolutely necessary in this case.

Jeff Harrell has posted a complete transcript of Rove's speech. He starts off with a summary of conservatism and its progress over the last forty years, looks at the 2004 election froma conservative prespective, and discusses Bush's policies and proposals as they relate to conservatism, among other things.

It's only towards the end that he made the statements that has the liberals' panties in a twist, and it's done in the context of setting up a classic "compare and contrast" of "we believe in X, they believe in Y" recitation.

Also, the only specific groups and individuals he singles out for special, scornful attention are Moveon.org, Michael Moore, Howard Dean, and Senator Durbin. He cites specifically where he disagrees with Moveon.org and Durbin, while he seems to presume that his audience doesn't need to be reminded of the numerous over-the-top statements of Moore and Dean.

And before anyone says Moore and Dean don't represent anyone but themselves, let's not forget Moore was given a seat of honor at the DNC last summer, and Dean was elected to lead the Democratic party.

But I'm not too upset with your mischaracterizing, frame. For one, you've given me a notion for a posting of my own. For another, you never had too much credibility with me to begin with.

J.

Jay Tea I cant eve... (Below threshold)
neil:

Jay Tea
I cant even resp;ond to your coemnts with sarcasm any more...

your arguement is as convoluted as GWB's syntax...

so you say Darth Rove was only talking about selective liberals and not Democrats, and then you say that Moore, Dubin and Dean are all integral parts of the Democratic machine (invited to the DNC and DNC chair)...

so you are agreeing that he did say Liberals = Traitors and wimps and Democrats = Traitors and wimps...He does smear all Liberals and all Democrats by your logic...

Shouldn't the argument at this time be more about uniting the country around a viable plan for winning in Iraq and in the War agaibnst Terror....not dividing it like Rove and Bush are seemingly intent...

It seems they are unfortunately more intent on following the strategic advice detailed below:

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

-Hermann Goering 4/18/46

As a liberal who lives in Manhattan; who had colleagues who never made it out of the Towers that day; who sat by the window in the middles of the night as the heavy equipment and (eventually useless )mobile morgues roared past; who lived with the stench of death and destruction that wafted over NYC for days; and who has friends who as first responders still bear the scars of selflessly working at ground zero for weeks...I cant be accused of being soft on terrorism...I supported the Afghanistan war...I support all efforts to find and hunt down OBL and his groups..I dont recommend therapy to terrorists now do any of my NYC liberal friends...

ROVE and BUSH, who spent most of that day sulking around the skies out of harms way, need to face up to the mess they have wrought and work with all of the country to develop a workable plan...not just degenerate into hostile nasty invective

s9, the ball's back in your... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

s9, the ball's back in your court. You've made completely unfounded allegations against me -- that I run Wizbang, that I receive regular payments for my efforts here, that I don't post under a pseudonym. I have categorically denied all those charges. It's now up to you to either present evidence to substantiate your slanders, or admit you were lying when you made them. The burden of proof is always on the accuser. Only in the most sick and twisted systems is anyone required to prove their innocence. I think one such place was the Soviet Union.

Why do you keep insisting on digging yourself deeper into your hole? Why can't you just admit you were making up charges to discredit me personally, instead of discussing the issues?

J.

Slanders? Charges? The Sovi... (Below threshold)
frameone:

Slanders? Charges? The Soviet Union? Are comparing what s9 said -- honest mistakes all -- with Soviet Gulags? What are you still wet nursing?

As to your comments on Rove... (Below threshold)
frameone:

As to your comments on Rove's speech. Come on. I addressed this in a comment to your ludicrous chess analogy post but mau as well repeat it here. Basically, it's what Neil said. Rove and the Republicans have spent the last decade or two painting all Democrats as liberals. If you guys suddenly want to start distinguishing between the two fine but don;t go pretending that by "liberal" Rove meant only a handful of certain people and groups. The idea that Dean oppossed a strong military response to 9-11 is a flat out lie and distortion designed to link the Democratic response to MoveOn's response which simply isn't the case. Again, you claim some special regard and respect for the use of language but then give a pass to the most odious double-speak to come down the political pike in a long while. Then start screaming slander when someone makes a mistake about whether or not Jay Tea is a pseudonym or not or if you get paid to write here or not. What a puss.

jay Tea writes: s... (Below threshold)
s9:

jay Tea writes: s9, the ball's back in your court. You've made completely unfounded allegations against me -- that I run Wizbang, that I receive regular payments for my efforts here, that I don't post under a pseudonym. I have categorically denied all those charges.

I'm sorry. Really I am. You know what? I confess I think these "completely unfounded allegations" sound completely silly divorced from context. And I'm having a hard time recalling the actual context in which I allegedly leveled these allegations. But even though I don't remember concocting such hideous and terrible slander against you, I suppose it's no skin off my nose if I just cop to it anyway. It sounds like the sort of thing I might lie about when I'm not at the top of my game. (When I really get cranking, my lies tend to be more entertaining. Last week I managed to launch a great one about John Conyers looking for conference room space in Transdneister.)

So here it is, Jay... even though I don't remember telling such horrible character murdering falsehoods about you, I'll apologize for appearing to have done it. My most sincere and regretful apologies to you and your grief-stricken family for any harm to your well-being I may have caused by my vicious and capricious remarks. I hope no one was hurt or deprived of any rightful consideration because of my poor judgment. I will endeavor to make amends as best I can. How can I help you better in the future, Jay? Because I really want to help.

I should mention that my pr... (Below threshold)
s9:

I should mention that my previous post is not sarcasm. Rather than play a stupid playground game of "deny everything and demand proof" in order to avoid apologizing for something inconsequential, I'm figuring— hey, why not?— I'll just cop to whatever batshit crazy thing Jay Tea really thinks I did here, and hope that maybe he'll inform me about it at some point in the future.

Really, Jay— I'm sorry, for whatever it is I said that made you think it was all those things. I don't remember saying it. But okay— I guess I did. Here's my official correction.

I hereby officially recognize that Jay Tea, which is his full legal name, holds no ownership stake in the Wizbang! blog enterprise, an advertising supported website, and his position on the masthead as a "contributing editor" is not a salaried job. I don't remember asserting any of those things, but evidently Jay does, so I must have done it. And for that, I'm truly sorry. Really, really sorry. It was a terrible vicious slander on my part, I'm sure. I literally don't know what I was thinking when I alledgedly wrote those things, but it couldn't have possibly been sensible. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to have to go check to see if someone has replaced the basil in my spice rack with salvia divinorum.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy