Karl Rove not only owes Democrats an apology, he's owes all Americans an apology for his outrageous comments that all Americans are not united to defeat terrorism! However, no one should be holding their breath for a Bush Administration official to admit a mistake. Self reflection and owning up to errors are not a part of their agenda, deceit and division are! Mr.. Rove's comments are a diversion tactic to take the focus off the news out of Iraq and Bush's plummeting poll numbers. He needs to apologize but that would help to heal this nation - something this administration is not interested in doing. Remember, Bush is a uniter not a divider! Yes, it REALLY has gotten THAT bad! The wheels have fallen off the Bush bus!

He owes no one an apology. he was at a political event, a partisan event, and made simple, some say accurate, comments.

Trent Lott says something stupid, complimenting Senator Strom Thurmond, and the Left goes ballistic, demanding he apologize--he did--and demanding he resign as Majority Leader--he did. In fact, he apologized 5 distinct times, yet the Left refused to accept this.

Senator Dick Durbin disgustingly compares the actions of our troops to Nazis, the Soviet gulag, and Pol Pot, people demand he apologize, and the Left goes ballistic, this time defending his actions and saying he did nothing improper.

Now Rove says something political at a political event, and the Left throws another conniption fit.

Oh! The hypcorisy!

Nixon: some say my opponent is a Communist. I, myself, would never stoop to making such charges.

Note to the White House - at least one \"judge\" in Illinois (that is where you claim to live, right MIB?) has gotten the Kool-Aid and is perfectly towing the party line.

By the way, MIB, Durbin did not compare our troops to Nazis and Pol Pot, he compared our \"interrogation\" techiniques. There is a difference, which even a \"judge\" who has abandoned American values and supports torture in our POW camps must be able to discern (BTW, in a report to the UN today, the US actually ACKNOWLEDGED torture at our prison camps, although still claiming they were \"isolated\" incidents).

But you and Rove both fail to acknowledge the basic truth of what Durbin said - in fact, Rove specifically referred to Durbin when he slandered all liberals as traitors:

The words of Senator Durbin - how interesting. Particularly when the words about the actual \"interrogation\" techniques were NOT Senator Durbin's - he was reading the words of an FBI investigation.

And what is this bullsh*t about a political event? So we aren't supposed to care that one of the most senior unelected officials in the White House is politically attacking innocent Americans? Since when?

Then what about Rep. Joe Wilson - was he speaking as a leader of America or at a political event when he basically gave a preview of what Rove was going to say?

You keep defending these folks as they use the basest, most disgusting rhetoric to attack those who disagree with them. In fact, on this mornings Today Show Dan Bartlett basically framed the issue - those Democrats who support Bush are "good" and those who do not are the ones Rove was talking about.

Well, I will be happy to be locked up with my fellow liberals for refusing to support the actions of the incompetent in the White House. King George does not deserve, nor will he obtain, my loyalty.

Hear here, Cpt!

But don't count on MIB to get anything involving Durbin or Democrats even vaguely right or accurate.

BTW, where were the Repuglicans when SaintWhorum, who hates gays like there's no tomorrow, was comparing Democrats to Nazis? He wasn't reading a report BY THE FBI WHICH VALIDATED WHAT DURBIN WAS SAYING. He was just spouting off like the ultramontane idiot he is. Weren't some Repugs defending him?

Most telling is that the little fat-faced coward Rove, who is so stridently patriotic (jingoistic) and feels the need at every turn to pimp the tragedy of 9/11, including in New York City itself, could not find a way to serve his country in the 1970s, when, in any case, he would not have been thrown into the quagmire that was Vietnam. He had a good six years, between 1974-1980, to avoid any major conflicts, but he was too busy "catapulting the propaganda," to put his "conservative" courage to the test. He, Cheney, Wolfie, even the ex-boozer and cokehead himself....

It would *almost* be forgiveable if Rove was speaking of his opinion without giving it much thought. But to have PREPARED that speech is unforgivable! Why don't he go and out another Valerie Plame or somehow further damage the CIA? BTW - Whatever happened to THAT investigation?!?!!!!!

I can't WAIT until history judges the "W" years as some of the darkest in American history! Isn't it time for Bush to drive my a Texas School Book Depository?!

Well, as I said before, the wheels have come off the Bush bus and THANKFULLY the majority of Americans have had enough! I can't wait to see his next poll numbers!

[ June 24, 2005, 12:52 PM: Message edited by: PewterPirate ]

MIB, sorry to lower myself but both you and Rove are disgusting!!!

Gawd, calm down. Do you guys know that some liberals have said we deserved 9-11? That we should have listened (and loved I guess) them more? Rove was speaking about them, and I think his mistake was using such a broad brush to INCLUDE so many who don't thinkt that way.

So in a way he was right. In a way Durbin was right. However in our politically correct, and divisive country everyone takes the NON-PC statements and tries to use them for political gain. PERIOD.

I'm a liberal, and I'll go on record saying that Rove owes absolutely nobody an apology, and the White House is 100% correct in standing behind him. Rove's comments accurately view how some people view the left, and he played into that. BFD. Grow some skin, you weenies.

If the left wanted to make use of this comment, they should have responded, "Mr Rove is absolutely correct. They saw the savagery and prepared for war. It's just a shame they went to war with the wrong countries."

LXN

[ June 24, 2005, 03:20 PM: Message edited by: Lexington ]

Well this truth I know - NO ONE has won since the Bush Administration took up residence in DC! The absolutely saddest thing is the "I'm a uniter, not a divider" Bushism! I've NEVER known this country to be more divided than it has been after the show of unity on 9/11! Who's responsible for that?

He's not a uniter. You know how you know that? Well, what is Bush' best strength? His focus, passion and "stick-to-it-evness". Well if he sticks to things so well and does not waver how can he be a uniter? Answer: He's not. wink

Thanks Lexington.

I'm not a news watcher 24/7 (and Thomas Roberst usually distracts me from actually soaking much up), but I did not really see that many, if any, democrats come to the DEFENSE of Durbin, like you see the Republicans with Rove. Many weren't all pissed off and demanding an apology, but they also weren't touting that there was nothing wrong with the comment either.

Besides, the conservatives have been after the democrats for bringing up things like the abuse, etc. that shows our enemies 'weakness' by fighting eachother. Well, how do these comments make that better? It doesn't. Rove is complaining that 40% of our country wants to be nice to terrorists. That doesn't undermine anything at all.

Please, I'm an out gay man living in Murika, I've got some thick skin. Rove is an uber-ass****. Even I was willing to go fight in Afganistan after 911 and I always think there is a better, more lasting way to accomplishing things than war. Funny thing is I was ready when they blew up those two ancient statues of the Budda so many years back. And Lex I understand your point about Iraq, they had nothing to do with 911. Clever how that uber-ass now has us focussing on "we did want to fight" in reference to Iraq. However, I still find what he said disgusting and MIB sticking up for it, as well. Just my opinion.

I didn't find Rove's comments "disgusting". If I did, I'd find about 95% of politics disgusting. (Hm, on second thought...) He's demonizing the other side. That's what politicians do. He wants to cement in these people's minds that "we are the party you want to be in charge" and/or "you can't afford to let that other party be in charge". And he did it by appealing to the redneck vigilante in all of us. He played fast-and-loose with both stereotypes and facts, and got a cheap laugh and a round of applause for it. Disgusting? I wouldn't say so. And even if it was the wrong move, the liberal response has done nothing but cement everything Rove said into people's brains, and they haven't helped their cause by seeming even whinier than Rove made them out to be in the first place. The White House response was all but set - they just shake their heads and sigh, "Liberals. What are you gonna do?" And America agrees.

LXN

[ June 24, 2005, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: Lexington ]

I don't understand what all of the fuss is about. Durbin and Rove both stated what almost everyone in the "Base" of their party believes. At least their being honest and not lying about it. Is the fact that Rove and Durbin said this really that surprising? Nah.. I for one enjoy the honesty.

So your saying we liberals should just sit back and take it from this guy like good little sheep? Hmm, maybe we should apologize for getting riled up over it huh? Or maybe we should kick his ass! You probably wanted Durban to apologize too, huh. All right, its more than likely true that democrats are world class pussies (no offense to women, I love women, oh and see news about Kerry trying to start an inquiry into the Downing Street memo...only 9 dems sign on) but to intimate that we want to see our soldiers killed is beyond the pale (did you even read everything he said- the entire quote?

Pay special attention to the implied meaning of his word "motives")

That man is a disgusting bastard!!!

Oh and that fat little f**k would never step foot on a battlefield I'm sure!!!

[ June 24, 2005, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: gobar ]

And Ann Coulter said we should go to Afghanistan, kill all the leaders, and forcibly convert the people to Christianity.

And Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell (arguably the "conscience" of the religious conservative movement in this country) blamed 9/11 on gays, women who won't be their husbands property, and anyone else who thought Robertson and Fallwell were full of crap.

So I guess we can now conclude that Bush, et. al., being conservatives, are aiming to convert all Iraqis to Christianity, and blame their political opponents for 9/11.

That's fair, right?

I think it was a real bs statement but I'm not really surprised. Partistan crowd or not that was a very wrong statement to make. There are a lot of liberal people in the military myself included. This is the most decisive administration ever so pretty much nothing any of them says surprises me anymore

And just who was doing the interrogating there, oh Master of Hypocrisy? Yup, our troops. Durbin's an ass. Shame on him.

Well, considering that the late journalist Steve Neal, an ultraliberal, often described Durbin as "Senator Flipper," and that almost every newspaper in the state of Illinois endorsed his opponent in 2002 (ripping Durbin six ways to Sunday), and that Durbin is one of the most disliked Senators within his own party, my words are, as always, accurate and truthful. They cannot be anything but.

Some people blinded by partisanship here just refuse to admit this. They need to have such enlightened, open minds like yours truly.

Here you go again! Durbin is NOT one of the "least-liked" Senators within his own party. He was elected to the NUMBER TWO POST!!! Out of 44 Democrats and one Independent, they chose HIM. Not Senators from Montana or New Mexico or Arkansas or Massachusetts or Rhode Island or New Jersey or California, etc. But Dick Durbin. So you've just got to let this piece of fiction go, MIB. LET. IT. GO.

Second, Durbin handily defeated his Repuglican opponent in Illinois. (Yes, yes, I know you'll come up with some excuse. Remember, you were also trying to slam Obama too, who is actually legislating like a moderate, unfortunately. He refused to sign Kerry's DSM letter, he voted for Condi Rice and Alberto Gonzales, and he refuses to be the lead, despite his strong home state support and high profile, on a number of progressive issues.) Durbin is hardly a "flipflopper," no matter what Steve Neal or anyone else says. His is a moderate-to-liberal Senator and has actually been one of the more courageous Democrats in the upper house.

Never let facts get in the way of your fantasies involving Durbin as some respected and well-liked senator.

If you really believe he was elected Minority Whip because he was liked by 44 democrats, you're more politically naive than I originally thought.

Also, it is irrelevant that he won handily. Just because someone wins doesn't make him the better person. I'll use your logic, which would mean Bush is clearly the better person than Kerry was. After all, Bush won by more votes than did Durbin.

Durbin won in a blue state--duh. When you have people who'd vote for a Democrat regardless of who that Democrat was, what would you expect? The lemmings of the party--minority voters, city folks, et. al. (sorry to shock you into reality here)--would vote for any Democrat, because...well, they're just supposed to.

Countless number of liberal journalists in this state criticized Durbin over the years, and Neal more than once wrote about Durbin's "flip-flopping" with irrefutable facts in his columns, as well as Durbin's vindictive partisanship (the reason he was chosen as Whip, something you cannot seem to comprehend). Neal repeatedly provided many examples of Durbin being a spineless idiot who was laughed at by his fellow Democratic senators.

And "moderate to liberal" senator??? Wow. What have YOU been smoking? Durbin is one of the most liberal senators to populate that chamber in years.

[ June 25, 2005, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: MIB ]

Rove is a politician - he was playing poltiics.

The Democratic party, having forgone politics for outright obstruction, whined to the other side to chastise their own for doing his job.

Had the Democratic party had ANY SENSE WHATSOEVER, it would have responded with detailed reminders about the support a HUGE majority of the left gave for a military response to 9/11. The Senator's who voted for the war, the self-described liberals who were pro-force in polls (they do exist), etc. (Edit: and distancing themselves from the loonies at MoveOn.org, etc, couldn't hurt)

Then they could twist Rove's words to indicate that what he was really criticizing were those on the left who think Bush SCREWED UP the military response - that the Democratic party isn't against a military solution for the War on Terror, but they don't believe in the Bush Administrations competence in running it (heck, there's lots of fodder for this).

But, having been in power so long, the power became taken as an entitlement, and not something the Democrats felt they had to earn - so they forgot how.

[ June 26, 2005, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: msully ]

Interesting item on Fox News Sunday today. When Durbin made his irresponsible statements in the public, taxpayer-financed forum of the Senate floor, of the Big 3 networks, only ABC and NBC reported the story, and it took them several days to do so; CBS ignored it.* But when Rove made his comments at a private luncheon in NYC, all three jumped on it at once and we've heard entirely too much of it there and everywhere else ever since.
_____
*And apparently has learned NOTHING from Rathergate!

gmg, that's not really much of a comparison. Why? Because the all of the 'networks' ended up reporting it and reported on all the Republican calls for censorship, apologies, etc. You have to keep in mind that network TV is not usually 'on top of things' news. It's a 20-24 minute show and there's usually a few 'feature' pieces that don't necessarily have to do with today's news.

Then just a few days later, irresponsible comments were said by someone on the 'other' side. So then it was like a 'he said, she said' deal where both were going at eachother.

And to point even the more obvious out, Karl Rove, just like Durbin, is paid by with American tax dollars, he does have a job in the administration! And anyone that knows political media would tell you that the White House gets MUCH more coverage than Congress. It's always been that way.

I don't really recall that much media hub-bub on Dick Cheney's f-bomb or the other Republican senator that went off on someone.

Tomorrow is poised to be a huge day news wise (Supreme Court). Last week was rather slow.

Okay, just because YOU SAY he's not respected by his fellow Democrats, he's not. Why don't you provide some objective proof of their dislike of him. Please. Evidence, you know....

Your logic is fallacious. First, W did not win \"handily\" either in 2000 (he lost) or in 2004 (he won by one of the thinnest margins in a century). Second, Illinois's vote totals and the United States's are incommensurate categories. So neither comparisons holds. I'd think that given your time in a \"court of law\" you'd be making a better argument than this.

This is BS. Illinois had a Repuglican governor just a few years ago--a grossly crooked Repuglican who still managed to win. AND Illinoisans had a Repuglican as the junior Senator as well--Peter Fitzgerald. Had he run for reelection he very well might have won, or at least given Obama a run for his money. So Illinoisans will vote for Repuglicans, despite your claims of \"lemmings.\" The same can be said of the Repuglican idiots who voted for Keyes--were you one of those \"lemmings,\" because I know you didn't traduce your principles and vote for the sole sane candidate in 2004, Obama, right? The fact remains that Durbin is popular in Illinois, because of his political positions AND his efforts on behalf of the state.

Your nasty little gibe at \"minorities\" shows the kind of person you are. Maybe if the Repuglicans acted like they gave even a hair's breadth of a damn about \"minorities\" they'd get more votes from them (us). Instead, they put forward raving, self-hating lunatics like Alan Keyes.

Steve Neal is just *one* journalist, MIB. I'm sorry, but your claims don't hold water. If you're quoting Bob Novak, Steve Kass, and other such right-wingers, I'd say you might at least be accurate in THEIR perceptions, but this notion that \"liberals\" are attacking Durbin without any proof is, well, groundless. I hope you didn't use such arguments in court....

Compared to the fascist right-wingers just elected, yes. Compared to the majority of senators in his caucus, Kennedy, Corzine, Lautenberg, Boxer, Obama, Schumer, Harkin, Reed, Mikulski, Sarbanes, Jeffords, Bingaman, Byrd, Leahy, Dodd, Kerry, Murray, Cantwell, Levin, Stabenow, Clinton, and Akaka, to name many of them, he is a "moderate to liberal."

Wait, Bush has a brain? Now THAT is breaking news!

MIB - you STILL stand by your man? Think he owes no one an apology?

[ July 12, 2005, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: PewterPirate ]

MIB -

Rove may have told someone without the need to know about a CIA officers identity.

It is war time. He deliberately blew her cover.

At very best he can't keep his mouth shut and should have his security clearances immediately - permanently - revoked.

That is treason.

If this were any lower level bureaucrat - or anyone else in gov't - that person would already be under arrest, and on their way to Guantanamo Bay.

Nothing is 'understandable' when it endangers the lives of any one of our people.

If she had been killed or injured, I would be screaming for the death penalty for him.

If it was anyone but Rove/Bush - so would you.

R