The headline to today's lead story in the New York Times by Jim Rutenberg and Steven Lee Myers on the impending resignation of Karl Rove, Bush's chief political advisor, included the subhead "A Bare-Knuckle Style of Politics."
Rove as ruthless partisan brawler was indeed a theme that permeated both Tuesday's lead story and chief political reporter Adam Nagourney's accompanying analysis.
From Rutenberg and Rove's lead:
"With his voice breaking at times, and with President Bush at his side on the South Lawn of the White House, Karl Rove said Monday that he would resign as a deputy White House chief of staff at the end of the month. The decision ends Mr. Rove's role as the president's longest-serving and closest aide, and the one who most personified the bare-knuckle brand of politics Mr. Bush favors."
Rutenberg and Myers did note Rove drew heat from both right and left, quoting blogger Michelle Malkin criticizing Rove's second-term policy pushes that alienated conservatives, such as what Malkin called the "illegal alien shamnesty" (Bush's amnesty program for illegal immigrants) and the Medicare prescription drug plan.
Adam Nagourney missed this nuance in his accompanying "news analysis," "Legacy Laden With Proteges."
In Nagourney's view, Rove apparently invented negative campaigning.
"Certainly, Mr. Rove has to a considerable extent changed the way presidential politics are played. Modeled on his example, campaigns have become more disciplined in driving simple, often negative messages. They begin in trying to identify the vulnerabilities of potential opponents, and they do extensive negative research as they prepare to exploit those vulnerabilities early and often."
[...]
"If some of Mr. Rove's signature achievements have been eagerly imitated, others -- including an emphasis on turning out Republican base voters by focusing on polarizing issues like same-sex marriage -- have been discredited by polls suggesting that the base is shrinking in Mr. Bush’s second term.
"Not incidentally, Mr. Rove also leaves the White House as an extraordinarily polarizing figure, as was evident on Monday in the way some conservative bloggers joined Democratic ones in expressing delight at his departure."
(Would it have killed Nagourney to say "liberal bloggers" to balance out the reference to "conservative bloggers"?)
Nagourney ended his Monday afternoon web column on Rove's resignation with a scolding.
"Many wonder if a strategy aimed entirely at methodically identifying and stoking the party's conservative base, with issues like gay marriage, abortion and terrorism, was ever a recipe for long-term political dominance, much less for governing a country."
That summary conveniently ignored other issues which angered conservatives and that had Rove's handiwork all over them, such as the failed illegal immigration amnesty program, the failed Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, and the successful Medicare drug bill. But including those in the Rove legacy would have ruined Nagourney's convenient shorthand of Rove as right-wing divider.
—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.













Comments Policy
Aren't all conservatives
August 14, 2007 - 14:59 ET by mattmAren't all conservatives polarizing and divisive? To the enemy, that is the Left...
Of course they ignore any accomplishments and focus only on what they think helps their argument...
A real journalist would look at the actions first, and then draw conclusions. Libs don't do that; they already have the conclusion (this is known as prejudice, for you trolls out there) and then they spin the facts to fit their prejudiced premise. Voila! BIAS
Accomplishments? Are you
August 14, 2007 - 15:16 ET byAccomplishments? Are you kidding! The Bush administration has drug our country through so much crap it's going to take decades to repair!
Maybe you're right. After
August 14, 2007 - 15:23 ET by SmartypantsMaybe you're right. After all, we're still trying to dig out of Clinton's crap. Personally, I think Bush has accomplished far more than Mr. Clinton ever did, and he did so in much more difficult times. Clinton had a cake walk with the dot-com madness that convinced everyone we had reached nirvana. When the bubble broke, it was Bush who had to clean up the mess. Bush is still trying to fix eight years of Clinton ignoring real world problems which could harm his popularity.
Clinton had the Republican
August 14, 2007 - 15:57 ET by TruthMongerClinton had the Republican congress running the country beautifully - it was just his job to take the credit...
Rove's "bare-knuckle politics?" Yes, so divisive wasn't he...?
Nice try MSM - but it's you that divides the country - we got yer number:) Nobody listens to you now except the drooling moonbats like blaster here...
blaster of plain stupidity and non-words
August 14, 2007 - 15:28 ET by Six String SpiffHey stupid, I believe the word you were looking for was "dragged"... What has the big bad evil Bush Administration done that 'is giong to take decades to repair'. You sound like one of my co-workers who just twitches and mumble 'criminal' in her chair.
Facts. Now. Else, leave.
The American Revolution Continued
Stupid people like you
August 14, 2007 - 15:29 ET by cvgbuckeyeblaster; we are aware of your stupidity by the blanket, baselessness of your remarks but we compassionate Consevatives are always willing to give an idiot a chance to redeem himself.
Please list the "crap" that you say The President has drug (something you are likely familiar with) the country through. I'm sure that you're just loaded with wisdom (although we know with what you are really loaded with). You sound like one of those roosters who thought he made the sun come up. So c'mon son, lets hear it.
blaster, do you mean
August 14, 2007 - 16:05 ET by bassndudeblaster, do you mean getting the terrorists to belive we are paper tigers again? You mean, like, defunding the military again? You mean like, letting terrorists in to go to flight school so they can pull another 9-11 when you leave office? Dismanteling the intelligence offices? Thats what you mean, right?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
We are now in a protracted
August 14, 2007 - 17:15 ET byWe are now in a protracted war with Iraq. How many Iraqi's attacked us on 9/11?
Who "let" the terrorists go to flight school? Two FBI agents warned FBIHQ about this, but nothing was done. Why not?
Clinton funded the military on roughtly the same level as Bush 1 and it actually, increased during his second term. After all, it was peacetime.
Why didn't the Bush administration have any interpreters to translate all the Middle Eastern chatter they were picking up on their wiretaps?
How many Iraqi's attacked us on 9/11?
August 14, 2007 - 17:19 ET by vrwc13I you are dumb enough to ask a question like that...no more response to you is needed...or would do any good.
v
"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
blaster...I see the liberal lobotomy worked for you
August 14, 2007 - 17:27 ET by LionKing"How many Iraqi's attacked us on 9/11?"
Do you really think all of the insurgents are Iraqi's? Do you understand that the enemy is Al Qaeda, not Iraq? Do you realize that Saddam and his 2 rapists sons where animals that needed to be deposed? Do you not realize that Saddam was in consort with Al Qaeda?
[btw, does it hurt you to be so ignorant?]
blaster dosent have a clue, only propaganda.
August 14, 2007 - 17:29 ET by bassndude"Who let the terrorists go to flight school?" Clinton had the wall so the fbi couldent tell the cia, nor visa versa.
Clinton did not fund the military on the same level as Bush 1. He cut the military by half, and some 50 billion dollars. The Army lost 4 active divisions and 2 reserve divisions. Between 1960 and 1991, the Army conducted 10 operations outside of normal training and alliance commitments, but between 1992 and 1998, the Army conducted 26 such operations.
Under the Clinton Administration, the U.S military suffered under a dangerous combination of reduced budgets, diminished forces, and increased missions. The result was a steep decline in readiness and an overall decline in U.S. military strength and morale.
They had interpreters, the same ones Clinton had. So the real question is why dident clinton have interpreters for all the ME chatter they were picking up?
It is now clear, you dont have a clue about what your talking about.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
intelligence
August 14, 2007 - 17:30 ET by Celumnaz"How many Iraqi's attacked us on 9/11? "
Verbally? On that day I'm not sure if Saddam shot at us as we did the usual UN sanctioned fly-overs. Not sure I see the point there...
"Who "let" the terrorists go to flight school? Two FBI agents warned FBIHQ about this, but nothing was done. Why not?"
That's part of the illegal immigration problem.
"Why didn't the Bush administration have any interpreters to translate all the Middle Eastern chatter they were picking up on their wiretaps?"
Something about previous administration building walls between intelligence services to better cover up his own misdealings and reduction of military intelligence/surveilence.
I remember them talking about not wanting to deal with unsavory characters or some such.
"If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - Bill Clinton - February 17, 1998
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al-Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Senator Hillary Clinton - October 10, 2002
Gee Whiz
August 14, 2007 - 17:45 ET by mattmAll this just because I suggested that journalists should start from the facts and then arrive at a conclusion, not the other way around... But leave it to a Libtard to miss the obvious and then vomit a bunch of worn out Leftist talking-points....
LOL! I'll tell you right
August 14, 2007 - 18:15 ET by Del DolemonteLOL! I'll tell you right after you tell us how many Germans attacked us at Pearl Harbor.
If I were Karl Rove I would
August 14, 2007 - 15:24 ET by Free ThinkerIf I were Karl Rove I would take all this as a compliment. The left knows he has been very successful and his accomplishments far outweigh his failures such as immigration reform. History will be kind to this administartion even if those in the msm today refuse to acknowledge facts.
I've never seen the msm
August 14, 2007 - 15:16 ET by SmartypantsI've never seen the msm refer to any liberal Democrat as "divisive" or "polarizing". These are terms reserved virtually exclusively to describe conservatives, at least in the political realm. Liberals are uniters, just as long as everyone agrees with them.
It is also interesting how the msm has, almost universally, cast Kark Rove as being some kind of underhanded Wizard of Oz. Try to think of the last time a Democrat, any Democrat, was characterized in this fashion. Don't hold your breath while doing so.
Hey Smarty
August 14, 2007 - 16:14 ET by PTWI recall Carville and Begala receiving many negative comments from your MSM for their rapid response/attack team and war room antics. It cuts both ways. Both Rove and C&B got too much credit and too much blame. But their jobs were to win elections, not govern is the same fashion. Rove helped with the elections but he as Sr. Domestic policy advisor put him in dicey historical waters with Harriet Miers nomination, SS reform, Immigration and I believe that whole thing with the Dubai Port deal.
Wedge issues to galvanize and draw out the base is his legacy alone because he was successful with those tactics. BTW, I heard he learned that from Lee Atwater. I think the NYT quoted in the article praise him for messaging clearly and consistently...ala C&B with "It's the economy, stupid:
Rovian Electoral Theory
August 14, 2007 - 15:29 ET byRove was the master at "winning" elections with 50%+1 of the electorate. That's no way to unite a country. Even in non-democratic countries you need a much high percentage of your population on board with policy to win wars. Too bad this administration still hasn't figured that out at this late date.
ROTFLMAO...thanks SPQR
August 14, 2007 - 15:34 ET by LionKingSo Bush narrowly won every election? Have you seen the election results map?
Careful, LK you'll have
August 14, 2007 - 15:40 ET by MightyMouthCareful, LK you'll have SPQR seeing red!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Bush won more than Clinton
August 14, 2007 - 15:53 ET by TruthMongerBush won more than Clinton (who was somewhere in the %40's)
43%
August 14, 2007 - 16:12 ET by vrwc13that's all...
v
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
Thanks vr... all together
August 14, 2007 - 16:14 ET by TruthMongerThanks vr...
all together now:
WELL "THAT'S DIFFERENT because blah blah blah:)"
Facts... Clinton won
August 14, 2007 - 16:38 ET by vrwc13Facts...
Clinton won the 1992 presidential election (43.0% of the vote) against Republican George H. W. Bush (37.4% of the vote) and billionaire populist H. Ross Perot, who ran as an independent (18.9% of the vote) on a platform focusing on domestic issues - Wiki
Why...
Perot (knowing he couldn't win) wanting to seem taller than he was, sucked votes from Bush allowing Clinton to slip in. Clinton was a "throw-away" candidate as dems knew they wouldn't win. 60 Minutes vaulted Clinton beyond his true credibility with a fluff piece. Bush was riding on his own coattails, checking his watch and giving away the farm.
Result...
8 years of ____________
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
Don't you know that when a
August 14, 2007 - 16:43 ET by motherbeltDon't you know that when a Republican wins 51% of the vote, that's a "divided" country; when a Democrat wins the Presidency with 43%, that's a "mandate"?
oops...i forgot. It was
August 14, 2007 - 17:13 ET by vrwc13oops...i forgot.
It was all fine until those stupid conservatives got wind of it.... - motherbelt
You forgot to finish the
August 14, 2007 - 17:56 ET byYou forgot to finish the sentence.
That would be--eight years of peace and prosperity.
No, blaster
August 14, 2007 - 18:00 ET by RJNo, blaster, that would be 8 years of a traitor who sold advanced weapons technology to the Chinese...
Don't forget NK
August 14, 2007 - 18:04 ET by LionKingDo not forget the nuclear blinders the Clinton's had with North Korea?
prosperity...???
August 14, 2007 - 18:03 ET by LionKingBy prosperity, do you mean all the corporations fudging on their earnings...Enron, MCI, etc...during Clinton Admin? or, do you mean the NASDAQ crash of 2000? or, the recession that started right before Clinton left office? Is that the prosperity you are referring to?
Peace...do you mean like the WTC 1 bombing? Kosovo? Bosnia? Somalia? US embassies in Africa? USS Cole? Is that the PEACE you are referring to?
You forgot to finish the sentence.
August 15, 2007 - 11:04 ET by vrwc13hint: the blank is a link ; ^ )
Lincoln won with only 46%,
August 14, 2007 - 17:32 ET byLincoln won with only 46%, another majorly three-way race.
"majorly"???
August 14, 2007 - 17:50 ET by RJ"majorly"???
Well, there's a majorly clue to your age and/or educational level.....
The election "results" map
August 14, 2007 - 17:25 ET byThe election "results" map is VERY misleading as it is based on counties. One county may have millions of residents while another might have only have three people and a few farm animals.
Newsflash 1. We don't tally votes by county.
Newsflash 2. Farm animals don't vote.
SPQR...did you read any of the other data
August 14, 2007 - 17:30 ET by LionKingDid you read any of the other data provided along with the maps?
The map was just an illustrative tool of how misinformed liberals are...the sad part is that they keep spreading the liberal talking points, aka LIES!!!
"Farm animals dont
August 14, 2007 - 17:37 ET by bassndude"Farm animals dont vote."
Ya dont say! Hear that, ma? Bossie cant vote anymore.
Show me ONE county that has only 3 people?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
I’m not sure, I think a
August 14, 2007 - 17:59 ET by USA4freedomI’m not sure, I think a few of those North West folk are
looking rather beastly..
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
With liars
August 14, 2007 - 15:38 ET by cvgbuckeyespqr: The way to win those kinds of elections is how Mr. Kennedy took Illinois and how upstanding liars like James Carville helped that great example of morallity like Bill Clinton I suppose.
Are you remotely familiar with the concept of leadership? It is when you continue to do the right thing, even when it is unpopular.
Your boy, Willie, when he could get out from behind his desk, ran the country by polls for 8 years. Right or wrong made no difference. Just whatever kept you popular.
To bad that this bunch of people (you) still haven't figured this out at this late date.
Effective leadership in
August 14, 2007 - 17:28 ET byEffective leadership in wartime creates effective consensus by its own virtue.
What?
August 14, 2007 - 17:37 ET by MightyMouth"Effective leadership in wartime creates effective consensus by its own virtue."
Tell that to Patton, if leadership would have listened to him there wouldn't have been a Cold War.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
"Effective leadership in
August 14, 2007 - 17:41 ET by bassndude"Effective leadership in wartime creates effective consensus by its own virtue."...Noooooo, it creates a win. You do not win wars by consensus or with consensus. You win it by killing the other guys. With a name like SPQR, seems like you would know that. Your a disgrace Rome!
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
SPQR, it is obvious that
August 14, 2007 - 15:40 ET by bassndudeSPQR, it is obvious that you cannot read election results. What else is it you cant do?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Kerry and Gore lost the
August 14, 2007 - 16:40 ET by Free ThinkerKerry and Gore lost the elections, how does a loser unite the country? I think you misunderstand how an election works. 2000 election was obviously close but Bush won. The 2004 election was not even that close.
2004? How do we really
August 14, 2007 - 17:35 ET by2004?
How do we really know that with RNC operatives going TO JAIL for faking the recounts and all the records ILEGALLY destroyed by even more RNC operatives. What are they hiding?
*** BDS ALERT ***
August 14, 2007 - 17:39 ET by LionKing*** BDS ALERT ***
BUSH stole the 2004 election just like he stole the 2000 election !!!
Leave him alone LK
August 14, 2007 - 17:44 ET by MightyMouthHe's gonna need somthing to tell his grandkids!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Credible cites, please. Key
August 14, 2007 - 18:26 ET by Del DolemonteCredible cites, please. Key word: CREDIBLE.
Rove's genius a media creation
August 14, 2007 - 15:49 ET by j17ghsI never really trusted Rove any more than I did [former White House chief of staff] Andy Card (who is a friend and confidante to the Kennedy Klan).
Always thought the media used Rove to explain how Bush could be so stupid (a la Reagan, Ford, et al.) and still walk and talk. So the media made Rove into a superman. Yeah, right. Only a dumbo-Demo would believe that (which includes most media elite, of course).
The real media genius is
August 14, 2007 - 17:37 ET byThe real media genius is Roger Ailes, the man assigned to make Nixon look good in front of the TV after loosing in 60 and 62.
A List of Bush's Accomplishments
August 14, 2007 - 16:24 ET by* Cut $39 million from federal spending on libraries
* Cut $35 million in funding for advanced pediatric training for doctors
* Cut funding for research into renewable energy sources by 50 percent
* Delayed rules that would reduce "acceptable" levels of arsenic in drinking water
* Cut funding for research into cleaner, more efficient cars and trucks by 28 percent
* Revoked rules strengthening the power of the government to deny contracts to companies that violate federal laws, environmental laws, and workplace safety standards
* AIlowed Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton to request suggestions for opening up national monuments for foresting, coal mining, and oil and gas drilling
* Broken your campaign promise to invest $100 million per year in rain forest conservation
* Reduced by 86 percent the Community Access Program, which coordinated care for people without health insurance among public hospitals, clinics, and other health care providers
* Nullified a proposal to increase public access to information about the potential ramifications of chemical plant accidents
* Cut funding for the Girls and Boys Clubs of America programs in public housing by $60 million
* Pulled out of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol agreement on global warming, ultimately signed by 178 other countries
* Rejected an international accord to enforce the 1972 treaty banning germ warfare
* Cut $200 million from workforce training programs for dislocated workers
* Cut $200 million from the Childcare and Development grant, a program that provides child care to low-income families as they are forced from welfare to work
* Eliminated prescription contraceptive coverage to federal employees (though Viagra is still covered)
* Cut $700 million in funds for public housing repairs
* Cut half a billion dollars from the Environmental Protection Agency's budget
* Overturned workplace ergonomic rules designed to protect workers' health and safety
* Abandoned your campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, a major contributor to global warming
* Prohibited any federal aid from going to international family planning organizations that provide abortion counseling, referrals, or services with their own funds
* Nominated former mining company executive Dan Lauriski as Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health
* Appointed Lynn Scarlett, a global warming skeptic and an opponent of stricter standards on air pollution, as Undersecretary of the Interior
* Approved Interior Secretary Gale Norton's controversial plan to auction off areas close to Florida's eastern shore for oil and gas development
* Announced your plans to allow oil drilling in Montana's Lewis and Clark National Forest
* Threatened to shut down the White House AIDS office
* Decided no longer to seek guidance from the American Bar Association on federal judicial appointments
* Denied college financial aid to students convicted of misdemeanor drug charges (though convicted murderers are still eligible for financial aid)
* AIlocated only 3 percent of the amount requested by Justice Department lawyers in the government's continued litigation against tobacco companies
* Pushed through your tax cut, 43 percent of which goes to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans
* Signed a bill making it harder for poor and middle-class Americans to file for bankruptcy, even when facing overwhelming medical bills
* Appointed affirmative action opponent Kay Cole James to direct the Office of Personnel Management
* Cut $15.7 million from programs dealing with child abuse and neglect
* Proposed elimination of the "Reading Is Fundamental" program, which gives free books to poor children
* Pushed for development of "mini-nukes," designed to attack deeply buried targets-a violation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
* Tried to reverse regulation protecting sixty million acres of national forest from logging and road building
* Appointed John Bolton, an opponent of nonproliferation treaties and the United Nations, as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
* Made Monsanto executive Linda Fisher deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
* Nominated Michael McConnell, a leading critic of the separation of church and state, to a federal judgeship
* Nominated civil rights opponent Terrence Boyle to a federal judgeship
* Canceled the 2004 deadline for auto makers to develop prototype high-mileage cars
* Named John Walters, an ardent opponent of prison drug treatment programs, as drug czar
* Appointed oil and coal lobbyist. Steven Giles as Deputy Secretary of the Interior
* Named Bennett Raley, who has called for the repeal of the Endangered Species Act, as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Water and Science
* Sought the dismissal of a class-action lawsuit filed in the United States against Japan by Asian women forced to work as sex slaves in World War II
* Appointed as solicitor general Ted Olson, your chief lawyer in the Florida voting debacle
* Proposed to ease the permit process for constructing refineries and nuclear and hydroelectric dams, including lowering environmental standards
* Proposed the selling of oil and gas tracts in the Alaska Wildlife Preserve
And this doesn't even begin to deal with the Iraq war and all the corruption associated with that. How do you "lose" 9 BILLION dollars IN CASH!
Thanks for the list...
August 14, 2007 - 16:34 ET by MightyMouthThanks for the list, I like the man more than ever!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
"See, in my line of work
August 14, 2007 - 16:39 ET by"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."--George W. Bush
Almost brings a tear to one's eye doesn't it?
August 14, 2007 - 16:44 ET by MightyMouthAlmost brings a tear to one's eye doesn't it? He may be one of the best presidents (besides Reagan) we have ever had! Wouldn't you agree?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
I read through this list and
August 14, 2007 - 16:35 ET by Free ThinkerI read through this list and then was confused at your conclusion. Are you suggesting any of this is bad?
Are you suggesting any of this is bad?
August 14, 2007 - 16:45 ET by vrwc13Yup. By this list he didn't
v
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
I'm with you free, Now
August 14, 2007 - 18:06 ET by USA4freedomI'm with you free,
Now give us the bad stuff.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
We, or rather, the federal
August 14, 2007 - 16:43 ET by bassndudeWe, or rather, the federal goverment, should never have been funding any of the stuff at the top anyway. Easing EPA rules was easing the way for more nuke plants and kyoto was, and still is, a joke. Nothing here but good things.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
blaster, please see my
August 14, 2007 - 16:45 ET by bassndudeblaster, please see my questions above, and answer them please.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
I'm impressed; that's some
August 14, 2007 - 16:56 ET by SmartypantsI'm impressed; that's some list. Can I vote for him again?
Can I vote for him again?
August 14, 2007 - 17:11 ET by vrwc13No, he forgot to repeal the 22 Amendment...oops. Although he still has time!
v
The reason that Christianity is the best friend of government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart.
Thomas Jefferson
"Christianity neither is,
August 14, 2007 - 17:21 ET by"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." -Thomas Jefferson
"Ignorance is preferable to
August 14, 2007 - 17:27 ET by vrwc13"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, 1782)
This is the very reason why
August 14, 2007 - 17:33 ET by tracheostomyThis is the very reason why I don't listen to D. James Kennedy. I wish you guys would get your quotes straight.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Of all the systems of
August 14, 2007 - 17:35 ET by vrwc13Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus.
Excellent quote!
August 14, 2007 - 17:39 ET byExcellent quote! Especially. when applied to Bush--the ignorance part in particular.
What are Bush's approval rating right now?
What are Bush's approval rating right now?
August 14, 2007 - 17:43 ET by vrwc13Better than Pelosi's, Reid's, and Dem controlled Congress! ) :
Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus. Thomas Jefferson
Bush approval ratings
August 14, 2007 - 17:42 ET by RJHigher than that of the Democratic Congress.
Well, I hate to answer my
August 14, 2007 - 18:04 ET byWell, I hate to answer my own question....but how about 26%. About the same as Richard Nixon as he was about to be impeached. Clinton was impeached...yeah, I know about that one. Poor guy got a hummer from a fat broad. Definitly poor judgement on his part. But to his credit, when he was impeached his approval rating was at 73%.
blaster...why was he impeached
August 14, 2007 - 18:07 ET by LionKingDo you know why Clinton was impeached...as in, what the criminal offense was?
Perjury and obstruction of
August 14, 2007 - 18:16 ET byPerjury and obstruction of justice, concerning a personal matter. Do you know who acquitted him?
personal matter
August 14, 2007 - 18:21 ET by LionKingTotal disregard for the rule of law. He disgraced the office of the POTUS with his sexual deviancy and infidelity. It became a PUBLIC matter when he became an elected official.
Yes, I know that US Senate failed to convict him...bipartisan cowards.
How about Nixon. Did he
August 14, 2007 - 18:24 ET byHow about Nixon. Did he disgrace the office?
Not like Clinton did, blaster
August 14, 2007 - 18:28 ET by RJNixon wasn't a traitor who sold military secrets to the Chicoms.
Just answer the question
August 14, 2007 - 18:38 ET byJust answer the question RJ. Did Nixon disgrace the office and don't give me anymore freeper BS.
73%
"freeper"? lol
August 14, 2007 - 18:42 ET by RJ"freeper"?
What, that Clinton is a traitor who sold military secrets to the Chicoms? Are you denying that he did? Better do some research that involves more than the KosKids site.
Give me a CREDIBLE site, and
August 14, 2007 - 18:53 ET byGive me a CREDIBLE site, and answer the question...or are ya a chicken?
You first, blaster
August 14, 2007 - 19:01 ET by RJYou first, blaster. Did Bill Clinton, the traitor and impeached liar, disgrace the office? Answer that honestly, and I'll answer about Nixon.
Yes, he did. Your turn.
August 14, 2007 - 19:04 ET byYes, he did.
Your turn.
Yes he did
August 14, 2007 - 19:13 ET by RJYes he did. Nixon accomplished a lot and was a great patriot, but he had a persecution complex that led to his downfall. He could have challenged Kennedy in a stolen election and probably won, but he chose to walk away for the good of the country.
Clinton, on the other hand, operated almost entirely for his own benefit, even when it was to the detriment of the United States.
P.S. I am a reformed liberal who voted against Nixon and for Clinton (the first time)
Persecution complex?! Can
August 14, 2007 - 19:20 ET byPersecution complex?! Can you say "Watergate break-in"? Perhaps you're too young to remember or you're still in denial. Never to late to educate yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal
blaster, if you aren't aware of Nixon's persecution complex
August 14, 2007 - 19:44 ET by RJthen you should excuse yourself from any discussion of Watergate. What, because Wikipedia didn't mention it, you think it didn't exist? Using Wikipedia to back any political argument just makes you look silly.
"P.S. I am a reformed
August 14, 2007 - 19:22 ET by"P.S. I am a reformed liberal who voted against Nixon and for Clinton (the first time)"
Ironic--I'm a reformed conservative who voted for Bush the first time and Clinton the second.
No offense, blaster, but
August 14, 2007 - 21:19 ET by RJI don't believe you....too convenient. Care to expound on that?
RJ
August 14, 2007 - 21:02 ET by shawn228P.S. I am a reformed liberal who voted against Nixon and for Clinton (the first time)
Wow RJ, I always figured you to be a life long GOPer. What made you switch?. Was it the Chinese thing or Monica or a combination?
Never assume, shawn
August 14, 2007 - 21:15 ET by RJIt always gets you into trouble.... ;^>
Actually, it was Hillary and Bill, combined with the evolving Democrat Party. She, an unelected official, attempted to arrogantly take over a huge percentage of our economy, and Bill was arrogantly transfering secrets to the detriment of our country. I began to look around critically at what the Democrat Party had become, and here I am.
RJ
August 14, 2007 - 21:26 ET by shawn228It always gets you into trouble.... ;^>
Some things never change lol:) I'm actually kind of scared of if/when Hillary is POTUS myself.
C'mon...if that were true,
August 14, 2007 - 19:15 ET by JerC'mon...if that were true, why didn't the Republicans impeach him for treason. Would have made a lot more sense than lying about sex.
That whole 'selling secrets to the commies' claim needs to be parked in the garage next to the Vince Foster murder fantasy.
Jer
Time to start doing some honest research, Jer
August 14, 2007 - 19:36 ET by RJAlthough there's something fishy about the Clinton's involvement in the Foster events, I'm not ready to buy into the murder scenario....but neither do I completely reject it.
As for Clinton and the Chicoms, I think no politicos had the courage to challenge him as a traitor. Nothing I can tell you will convince you, but let's begin your education with this from my personal memory of the events. Basically,Clinton transferred technology through manipulation of various government agencies:
To begin with, the US had super computers under the control of the Department of Defense that Clinton wanted to sell to the Chinese, but the DOD said absolutely not. (At the time, no one else had a computer this powerful.) The Chicoms needed it because their computers weren't capable of performing the calculations needed to make their rockets perform properly. (They kept crashing) Clinton, with an Executive Order, changed the "ownership" of the computers to the Department of Agriculture and then ordered them to sell the machines to the Chinese, which they did. Other technology followed through other manipulations and soon the Chinese were able to successfully launch their rockets.
That was typical of how Clinton allowed the Chinese access to secrets...through manipulations in various areas of the government. The upshot is that the Chinese, who could not get their ICBMs to function are now able to target the US.
If you're serious about finding the truth, do a little honest research. The information is fairly widespread.
Loral Space and
August 14, 2007 - 19:52 ET by mastersofdeceitLoral Space and Communications:
"...the February 1998 waiver by President Clinton for export of a Loral-built satellite to be launched in China is also part of the controversy. "
RJ...As indicated in other
August 14, 2007 - 22:55 ET by JerRJ...As indicated in other posts, I do make a concerted effort to approach contentious issues with an open mind. I hope you do too. And I always can be persuaded by facts, which on occasion--when confronted with sufficiently compelling facts--has resulted in the revision of a previously held opinion of mine. My assessment of Ronald Reagan is a salient example.
Before getting back into source material, my recollection is that the whole waiver process had begun in Republican administrations, more waivers had been issued in those administrations, the practice being strongly supported by Republican congressmen both prior to and during the Clinton presidency, with the upshot being that far more sensitive ballistic missile technology had been provided the Chinese by Reagan and Bush I as opposed to Clinton.
I am not as familiar with the super computer issue, but I will certainly take a look at that and see what I can find out.
Finally RJ, in all seriousness, just how many investigations would it require [all reaching the same conclusion] before you would be willing to close the books on the Foster matter?
Anyway, thanks for your comment--it does raise some interesting questions.
Jer
As I said, Jer, my mind is still open on Foster,
August 15, 2007 - 09:02 ET by RJbut it's not a subject I've spent much time on the subject...as it seems you have. As I recall, the Clinton's (and staff?) behavior after his death raised some red flags. Which report(s) do you see as independent AND conclusive?
BTW, rejecting Jack's reference because you dislike his bantering style flies in the face of your stated willingness to investigate with an open mind. If the information is good (and the link is a good one) then it stands on it's own.
RJ... Jack is more than
August 15, 2007 - 09:43 ET by JerRJ...
Jack is more than capable of posting intelligent and informative comments. I've read them. But this was the second time he has replied to a comment of mine, and both times he has resorted to unprovoked adolescent taunts. It doesn't advance productive debate, it shuts it off, and I just don't care to involve myself with it.
BTW, I do want to look into the super computer issue. Haven't had a chance to yet. Re Foster, I think there have been at least five separate investigations--Starr, Fiske, FBI, National Park Service, a couple of GOP Congressional committees--all concluding it was definitely suicide.
Hope to talk with you later,
Jer
C'mon...if that were
August 14, 2007 - 20:01 ET by Jack BauerWhat are you, like 10 years old? I only ask because that sounds like the sort of "logic" a ten year old might employ.
I suppose you think that Al Capone was only a tax evader, because uh -- that was all he was prosecuted for -- and not for being a mobster, a rackateer or a murderer.
JB, if you would be
August 14, 2007 - 22:20 ET by JerJB, if you would be interested in exchanging views or debating issues without resorting to juvenile quips, I'd be happy to do so. Otherwise, you're wasting your time and mine.
Thanks,
Jer
It's amazing how many
August 14, 2007 - 22:42 ET by KhyrisIt's amazing how many people forget that the primary reason he was being questioned about his "private" sex life was that it established character and habit for the investigation that he sexually harrassed Paula Jones.
Sexual harassment is a crime. Calling her trailor trash doesn't make it any less of a crime, because in America even if that filthy slander were true, trailor trash is still entitled to due process.
Was Clinton guilty of sexual harassment? Even with his admitted record, I'm willing to say innocent until proven guilty. That would never excuse perjuring himself, nor is it a good tactic to lie when you're trying to prove your innocence. Libby was just as dumb if, as the jury found, he perjured himself. If he had told the absolute truth to investigators (assuming he didn't) when it finally came back around that no crime had been committed, he would have been free and clear. Same thing with the federal prosecutors. No crime was committed there either in the firings. It's the obstruction of justice that's going to bite SOMEbody on the behind.
Lying BAD. Telling the truth about what you know GOOD.
Nixon...
August 14, 2007 - 18:32 ET by LionKingNixon did not abuse his office for his personal gratification. Nixon did far more good than Kennedy, LBJ, Carter, and Clinton put together...and still falls very short of Reagan.
"Nixon did not abuse his
August 14, 2007 - 18:42 ET by"Nixon did not abuse his office for his personal gratification"
You mean like winning an election?
LOL...blaster
August 14, 2007 - 18:48 ET by LionKingGeez...No wonder Democrats want ot win an election...that's how they achieve orgasm!!!
rotflmao...pathetic
LOL. Sorry, but you
August 14, 2007 - 18:40 ET by Del DolemonteLOL. Sorry, but you apparently never learned in your law school courses at Moe Howard University that the subject of the perjury is immaterial. It's a felony no matter what the lie is about. Clinton could have been lying about anything, even something as trivial as a conversation that happened 3 years ago (as Scooter Libby was accused of) and it still would have been a felony offense.
As for Clinton's acquittal, the people who acquitted him heard two sides of the story. They heard the side brought by the Impeachment Managers, the majority of whom hadn't argued a court case in decades. On the other side wer