NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: I've purposely been holding off until the dust settled a bit on the Carl Rove "outting" of CIA employee Valerie Wilson. Now, it appears that things were not as first presented in the media. Surprise, surprise.


Where's the Newt? (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/16/opinion/16tierney.html?th&emc=th)

By JOHN TIERNEY
Published: July 16, 2005

We are in the midst of a remarkable Washington scandal, and we still don't have a name for it. Leakgate, Rovegate, Wilsongate - none of the suggestions have stuck because none capture what's so special about the current frenzy to lock up reporters and public officials.

The closest parallel is the moment in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" when members of a mob eager to burn a witch are asked by the wise Sir Bedevere how they know she's a witch.

"Well, she turned me into a newt," the villager played by John Cleese says.

"A newt?" Sir Bedevere asks, looking puzzled.

"I got better," he explains.

"Burn her anyway!" another villager shouts.

That's what has happened since this scandal began so promisingly two summers ago. At first it looked like an outrageous crime harming innocent victims: a brave whistle-blower was smeared by a vicious White House politico who committed a felony by exposing the whistle-blower's wife as an undercover officer, endangering her and her contacts in the field.

But if you consider the facts today, you may feel like Sir Bedevere. Where's the newt? What did the witch actually do? Consider that original list of outrages:

The White House felon So far Karl Rove appears guilty of telling reporters something he had heard, that Valerie Wilson, the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV, worked for the C.I.A. But because of several exceptions in the 1982 law forbidding disclosure of a covert operative's identity, virtually no one thinks anymore that he violated it. The law doesn't seem to apply to Ms. Wilson because she apparently hadn't been posted abroad during the five previous years.

The endangered spies Ms. Wilson was compared to James Bond in the early days of the scandal, but it turns out she had been working for years at C.I.A. headquarters, not exactly a deep-cover position. Since being outed, she's hardly been acting like a spy who's worried that her former contacts are in danger.

At the time her name was printed, her face was still not that familiar even to most Washington veterans, but that soon changed. When her husband received a "truth-telling" award at a Nation magazine luncheon, he wept as he told of his sorrow at his wife's loss of anonymity. Then he introduced her to the crowd.

And then, for any enemy agents who missed seeing her face at the luncheon but had an Internet connection, she posed with her husband for a photograph in Vanity Fair.

The smeared whistle-blower Mr. Wilson accused the White House of willfully ignoring his report showing that Iraq had not been seeking nuclear material from Niger. But a bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that his investigation had yielded little valuable information, hadn't reached the White House and hadn't disproved the Iraq-Niger link - in fact, in some ways it supported the link.

Mr. Wilson presented himself as a courageous truth-teller who was being attacked by lying partisans, but he himself became a Democratic partisan (working with the John Kerry presidential campaign) who had a problem with facts. He denied that his wife had anything to do with his assignment in Niger, but Senate investigators found a memo in which she recommended him.

Karl Rove's version of events now looks less like a smear and more like the truth: Mr. Wilson's investigation, far from being requested and then suppressed by a White House afraid of its contents, was a low-level report of not much interest to anyone outside the Wilson household.

So what exactly is this scandal about? Why are the villagers still screaming to burn the witch? Well, there's always the chance that the prosecutor will turn up evidence of perjury or obstruction of justice during the investigation, which would just prove once again that the easiest way to uncover corruption in Washington is to create it yourself by investigating nonexistent crimes.

For now, though, it looks as if this scandal is about a spy who was not endangered, a whistle-blower who did not blow the whistle and was not smeared, and a White House official who has not been fired for a felony that he did not commit. And so far the only victim is a reporter who did not write a story about it.

It would be logical to name it the Not-a-gate scandal, but I prefer a bilingual variation. It may someday make a good trivia question:

What do you call a scandal that's not scandalous?

Nadagate.

Strange how some people on here will jump all over any accusation of people like Carl Rove the moment they read it, yet totally ignore a post which at lest tries to be straight-forward and factual. Tsk! :p

Ignore what? Tierney's a hack who's misrepresenting the facts of the case. He's repeating discredited right-wing talking points. I really had higher hopes for you on this issue Eutrusca, and I said so on another thread. Don't prove me wrong, please.

Who is this Carl Rove you're talking about? Or do you mean Karl Rove? You sure do pay attention, Eutrusca! Do you actually read your articles to get spellings right, or do you just post them?

Ignore what? Tierney's a hack who's misrepresenting the facts of the case. He's repeating discredited right-wing talking points. I really had higher hopes for you on this issue Eutrusca, and I said so on another thread. Don't prove me wrong, please.
About what I expected from you, sadly. You can be quite lucid when you aren't being knee-jerk with your prejudices.

Who is this Carl Rove you're talking about? Or do you mean Karl Rove? You sure do pay attention, Eutrusca! Do you actually read your articles to get spellings right, or do you just post them?
Great response to the question. About what I've come to expect from you too.

Great response to the question. About what I've come to expect from you too.
thank you! :D To answer your article in short, many liberals and Democrats know that Karl is Satan, so we must nail him first chance we get. Sort of like how the Republicans nailed Clinton over a blow job.

btw, you never answered my question asking if you actually read the articles you post.

Strange how some people on here will jump all over any accusation of people like Carl Rove the moment they read it, yet totally ignore a post which at lest tries to be straight-forward and factual. Tsk! :p

If it is nothing than why are the courts and the CIA hopping about it?

It isn't just the 'liberal media'.

Well... The article summarizes nicely, but analyzes with quiote a bit of pro-Rove bias.


And of course, there was at least one factual error.

We do not know that Valerie Plame was not undercover, and in fact we have good reason to beleive she was. After all, why would the CIA start an investigation if she were not?

I certainly don't take it at face value whatsoever, and I think that political bias probably influenced the conclusion. That said, I haven't seen an intelligent moderate attempt to descern what happened yet...

Edit: I shouldn't try to post before I have my coffee.

Two things:

1.) This isn't just the 1982 statute we're talking about here.

2.) Plame's fellow agents who used the same fake business as a cover are now compromised as well. As are Plame's international contacts. THe repurcussions of this could be far and wide.

So what you're saying Eutrusca, is we should blame ourselves for the fact that your thread has failed to sway us?

Nice.

There is no there there.

I believe an apt name for this whole inane tempest in a teapot should be:

Plame-Out.

I can't be the only one who has thought of this, so I won't take credit for it. But it does have a very 'punny' double entendre don't you think?

So what you're saying Eutrusca, is we should blame ourselves for the fact that your thread has failed to sway us?

Nice.
he thought by the title that it would be enough to sway us, but since he never reads any of the articles he posts, obviously it's not.

Put it in the grave with all of the other overused phrases like "dope", "fresh", "phat", etc.

Figures, I was hoping for a funny thing involving monty python and the rove being an jackass scandal, but I didn't check who wrote it: Eutrusca, if I had checked that first I would have known to expect the partisan crap this obviously is

Could it be that the Dems are so inept at trying to find something, anything, evrything to nail him that these so called "Gates" are easily shot down within days of flaring up? There's never anything to them.

I know how you feel. I wanted Clinton's sorry ass on a rail out of Washington DC just as bad as you want W gone. It turned out OK. Clinton's law license was revoked and he was shown to be completely willing to lie under oath (it wasn't JUST about the hummer) and he got impeached but not removed from office, sparing us the agony of a Gore presidency.

But really, you need to give up already. I'm tired of watching you all bash your heads against the wall. The novelty has worn off.

You know, with all these puppets the rightwing could put on a nice puppet show,though it would be quite slanted with every puppet's line including an insult to the liberals

ps, I found the newt
http://www.famouspeople.com/famous/_images/55.jpg

Ihatevacations']You know, with all these puppets the rightwing could put on a nice puppet show,though it would be quite slanted with every puppet's line including an insult to the liberals

ps, I found the newt
http://www.famouspeople.com/famous/_images/55.jpg

Actually, I'm sure to your horror, the Newt has been making rumblings about - yes, running for President!

If it is nothing than why are the courts and the CIA hopping about it?

It isn't just the 'liberal media'.

Everybody knows that CIA stands for Communist Inclination Advertizing. Anyone who knows as much as the CIA does about stuff can't help but fall to a liberal bias. They've got too many facts and stuff. Lost track of what really makes for sound policy. Unwavering faith in one's own opinion and agenda. [/Sarcasm]

Let me get this straight, calling me a puppet, as if I don't have a mind of my own or the ability to think for myself, isn't an insult?

Ignore what I said. Glom onto to some other farfetched media manufactured scandal with no substantial eveidence. Get disappointed again when someone 'stupider' than you kicks your asses at your own game.

OR

Accept reality. Pick your battles better. Win an election. Impeach Bush.

<snip>
wow, I like how he turns this around and attacks Clinton while playing the victim card.

Ignore what? Tierney's a hack who's misrepresenting the facts of the case. He's repeating discredited right-wing talking points. I really had higher hopes for you on this issue Eutrusca, and I said so on another thread. Don't prove me wrong, please.
*grins evilly*

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/politics/15rove.html?ei=5094&en=15d2c0ff1133350b&hp=&ex=1121400000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&oref=login

login:

gosox45

gosox




WASHINGTON, July 14 - Karl Rove, the White House senior adviser, spoke with the columnist Robert D. Novak as he was preparing an article in July 2003 that identified a C.I.A. officer who was undercover, someone who has been officially briefed on the matter said.

Mr. Rove has told investigators that he learned from the columnist the name of the C.I.A. officer, who was referred to by her maiden name, Valerie Plame, and the circumstances in which her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, traveled to Africa to investigate possible uranium sales to Iraq, the person said.

After hearing Mr. Novak's account, the person who has been briefed on the matter said, Mr. Rove told the columnist: "I heard that, too."

The previously undisclosed telephone conversation, which took place on July 8, 2003, was initiated by Mr. Novak, the person who has been briefed on the matter said.

Six days later, Mr. Novak's syndicated column reported that two senior administration officials had told him that Mr. Wilson's "wife had suggested sending him" to Africa. That column was the first instance in which Ms. Wilson was publicly identified as a C.I.A. operative.

The column provoked angry demands for an investigation into who disclosed Ms. Wilson's name to Mr. Novak. The Justice Department appointed Patrick J. Fitzgerald, a top federal prosecutor in Chicago, to lead the inquiry. Mr. Rove said in an interview with CNN last year that he did not know the C.I.A. officer's name and did not leak it.

The person who provided the information about Mr. Rove's conversation with Mr. Novak declined to be identified, citing requests by Mr. Fitzgerald that no one discuss the case. The person discussed the matter in the belief that Mr. Rove was truthful in saying that he had not disclosed Ms. Wilson's identity.

On Oct. 1, 2003, Mr. Novak wrote another column in which he described calling two officials who were his sources for the earlier column. The first source, whose identity has not been revealed, provided the outlines of the story and was described by Mr. Novak as "no partisan gunslinger." Mr. Novak wrote that when he called a second official for confirmation, the source said, "Oh, you know about it."

That second source was Mr. Rove, the person briefed on the matter said. Mr. Rove's account to investigators about what he told Mr. Novak was similar in its message although the White House adviser's recollection of the exact words was slightly different. Asked by investigators how he knew enough to leave Mr. Novak with the impression that his information was accurate, Mr. Rove said he had heard parts of the story from other journalists but had not heard Ms. Wilson's name.


An interesting devolpment, which if true makes fools of most of the Democrat politicians.

There is no there there.

I believe an apt name for this whole inane tempest in a teapot should be:

Plame-Out.

I can't be the only one who has thought of this, so I won't take credit for it. But it does have a very 'punny' double entendre don't you think?
Nope, you're not.

From here.
http://daybydaycartoon.com/



http://img346.imageshack.us/img346/1450/plameout1hv.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Discredited right wing talking points? I heard that from the same people who tried valiently to defend Dan Rather. Looks like you are going down the same path. That's too bad really. I've seen some otherwise smart people go down that path.

Discredited right wing talking points? I heard that from the same people who tried valiently to defend Dan Rather. Looks like you are going down the same path. That's too bad really. I've seen some otherwise smart people go down that path.
It's called "ideological pigheadedness," and it's catching! Ick!

*grins evilly*

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/politics/15rove.html?ei=5094&en=15d2c0ff1133350b&hp=&ex=1121400000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&oref=login

login:

gosox45

gosox





An interesting devolpment, which if true makes fools of most of the Democrat politicians.

And here I thought I was the only one to be updated with the bit of information that Rove didnt actually say her name first, meaning she was already "outed". I'm going to guess that the husband outed her but is too stupid to remember doing so... :D

Since when does presenting FACTS ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY happened 'attacking' Clinton?
If stating irrefutable facts about what happened during Clinton presidency is considered an attack to his enablers, what does that say about Bill Clinton?

Discredited right wing talking points? I heard that from the same people who tried valiently to defend Dan Rather. Looks like you are going down the same path. That's too bad really. I've seen some otherwise smart people go down that path.

"Courage"!

Since when does presenting FACTS ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY happened 'attacking' Clinton?
If stating irrefutable facts about what happened during Clinton presidency is considered an attack, what does that say about Bill Clinton?

Come on, you know it's the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" that is behind all of this. Esp big oil, Haliburton, Rush Limbaugh, and the NRA.

#25
The term "willful ignorance" works just as well.

#25
The term "willful ignorance" works just as well.
Not really. True, you can be willfully ignorant, but it takes an ideologue ( or a religious fundamentalist ) to go about it in an organized manner. :)

Let's see the list of liberal Democrats who are concerned about the exposure of CIA agents and leaking of classified information:

The CIA
The DOJ
The Special Prosecutor
President George W. Bush
The White House
various prominent Republicans

....

Yep, just a vast left-wing conspiracy. That is why they threatened Cooper with jail and locked up Judith Miller. For Nadagate.

:headbang:

(By the way, for you partisans out there: This isn't just about Karl Rove. It never was just about Karl Rove. It is about whoever leaked classified information. It is about exposing CIA agents, a CIA cover business, and undermining national security.

Karl Rove was long thought to me the main culprit. Perhaps he is not. We don't know yet. (Just because sources say he told the Grand Jury he merely passed on something he heard is less than conclusive.) He is innocent of any crime until proven guilty. He has lied about his role in the matter more than once. He has been deliberately deceptive. We don't know if he leaked classified information or violated any law.

BUT SOMEBODY DID! Stop trying so hard to cover Rove's ass and, bless your partisan little hearts, think about the real issue!)

<snip>
once again, Cat-Tribe fights back with rational thinking! :D

I think this is a case of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

Let's see the list of liberal Democrats who are concerned about the exposure of CIA agents and leaking of classified information:

The CIA
The DOJ
The Special Prosecutor
President George W. Bush
The White House
various prominent Republicans

....

Yep, just a vast left-wing conspiracy. That is why they threatened Cooper with jail and locked up Judith Miller. For Nadagate.

:headbang:

(By the way, for you partisans out there: This isn't just about Karl Rove. It never was just about Karl Rove. It is about whoever leaked classified information. It is about exposing CIA agents, a CIA cover business, and undermining national security.

Karl Rove was long thought to me the main culprit. Perhaps he is not. We don't know yet. (Just because sources say he told the Grand Jury he merely passed on something he heard is less than conclusive.) He is innocent of any crime until proven guilty. He has lied about his role in the matter more than once. He has been deliberately deceptive. We don't know if he leaked classified information or violated any law.

BUT SOMEBODY DID! Stop trying so hard to cover Rove's ass and, bless your partisan little hearts, think about the real issue!)
Was this post directed at me??? :eek:

I have no idea whether Rove is actually guilty or not, and am just as interested in uncovering the truth as anyone else. I started this thread with that article because I thought it was well-written and closely-reasoned, not because I had any ax to grind.

We don't know if he leaked classified information or violated any law.
Stop trying so hard to cover Rove's ass and, bless your partisan little hearts, think about the real issue!)


That's true, but you would just love to see him guilty.

First you say he has not been found guilty of anything yet, then you say we are "trying so hard to cover his ass"? WTF

All people are innocent until PROVEN guilty, I'll defend anyone until the evidence is laid out and they are convicted of something.

I think this is a case of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
of what? right wing puppets?

Cat Tribe-
I can see some holes in your response. I will educate you later.
Right now, I have to go eat gumbo and play pool.

Was this post directed at me??? :eek:

I have no idea whether Rove is actually guilty or not, and am just as interested in uncovering the truth as anyone else. I started this thread with that article because I thought it was well-written and closely-reasoned, not because I had any ax to grind.

Too late to play all innocent.

The original article had an obvious ax to grind. As did your comment:

COMMENTARY: I've purposely been holding off until the dust settled a bit on the Carl Rove "outting" of CIA employee Valerie Wilson. Now, it appears that things were not as first presented in the media. Surprise, surprise.

Since then you've alternated between sharpening and swinging the axe:

Strange how some people on here will jump all over any accusation of people like Carl Rove the moment they read it, yet totally ignore a post which at lest tries to be straight-forward and factual. Tsk! :p
About what I expected from you, sadly. You can be quite lucid when you aren't being knee-jerk with your prejudices.
It's called "ideological pigheadedness," and it's catching! Ick!
Not really. True, you can be willfully ignorant, but it takes an ideologue ( or a religious fundamentalist ) to go about it in an organized manner. :)

You haven't made a single substantive comment or evaluated or discussed any of the so-called "facts" or "reasoning" in the original post. You've called anyone not willing to simply accept Tierney's pablum as "knee-jerk" "ideolgoue[s]."

But you were really just interested in a discussion of the topic .... sure. :rolleyes:

Selling any bridges today?

That's true, but you would just love to see him guilty.

First you say he has not been found guilty of anything yet, then you say we are "trying so hard to cover his ass"? WTF

All people are innocent until PROVEN guilty, I'll defend anyone until the evidence is laid out and they are convicted of something.

I am glad we can agree that O.J. Simpson, Bill Clinton, and others are innocent. :D

Rove is guilty of lying and being deceptive about his role in all this -- even if you go merely by his own trail of admissions over time. His story has changed several times.

Rove is definitely involved. He now admits it. The question is what exactly he did or did not do and whether it was wrong and/or criminal.

(By the way, for you partisans out there: This isn't just about Karl Rove. It never was just about Karl Rove. It is about whoever leaked classified information. It is about exposing CIA agents, a CIA cover business, and undermining national security.

Perhaps you should take this message over to the DNC then, as they have been gunning for Rove, and the Republicans are responding to that. Of course, if everybody wold just shut up and wait until after the grand jury has convened we would find out who they're actually going to go after, but since that is the sensible thing to do that is the exact opposite of what everyone is doing. Or most people I should say.

Cat Tribe-
I can see some holes in your response. I will educate you later.
Right now, I have to go eat gumbo and play pool.

Okey-dokey.

I'll just sit here and hold my breath until you "educate" me. ;)

All people are innocent until PROVEN guilty, I'll defend anyone until the evidence is laid out and they are convicted of something.
not in Texas

Too late to play all innocent.

The original article had an obvious ax to grind. As did your comment:

Since then you've alternated between sharpening and swinging the axe:

You haven't made a single substantive comment or evaluated or discussed any of the so-called "facts" or "reasoning" in the original post. You've called anyone not willing to simply accept Tierney's pablum as "knee-jerk" "ideolgoue[s]."

But you were really just interested in a discussion of the topic .... sure. :rolleyes:

Selling any bridges today?
Good job of quoting my posts out of context. As I recall, the only times I accused people of being "idiological" or "knee-jerk" was when they were being, in fact, ideological or knee-jerk. I couldn't give a crap whether anyone is willing to "simply accept Tierney's pablum as" anything. Take it, leave it, or ignore it. I was trying to start a bit of discussion about this issue, and that's the sum of it.

Perhaps you should take this message over to the DNC then, as they have been gunning for Rove, and the Republicans are responding to that. Of course, if everybody wold just shut up and wait until after the grand jury has convened we would find out who they're actually going to go after, but since that is the sensible thing to do that is the exact opposite of what everyone is doing. Or most people I should say.
Egggg-zactly! Well said! :)

I am glad we can agree that O.J. Simpson, Bill Clinton, and others are innocent. :D

Rove is guilty of lying and being deceptive about his role in all this -- even if you go merely by his own trail of admissions over time. His story has changed several times.

Rove is definitely involved. He now admits it. The question is what exactly he did or did not do and whether it was wrong and/or criminal.


Guilty of lying? Do you mean perjury? Has he been convicted of that? I seriously doubt that you have some inside knowledge of this case, or that you are a witness of some sort for the prosecuter, so try not to play partisan games.

OJ is not guilty, as is Bill (he was only guilty of loving America too much :rolleyes: ) Since I thought you were some ambulance chaser to begin with, I thought you would know the difference between being found "not guilty" and actually being "innocent".

He has lied about his role in the matter more than once. He has been deliberately deceptive.
I bolded this, I wish I could make it flash and make noise.

This is important. This is key. This is being deceptive and deliberately obtuse about something FAR FAR greater than a blow job. And heres the thing-while I don't think it was worth $10 million taxpayer dollars to ask that question I do agree about the legality of lying and the worminess of trying to sidestep it.

But if I'm going to get on one when it's really a matter between a man and his wife, then when the issue is more serious, and the person is effecting a lot more than just his family-yeah, that's serious. So, to me, hemming and hawing about the specific legality is a red herring to the issue of how trustworthy this administration is, and this whole thing has been a giant torpedo hole in what I see as an already sinking ship.

Rove gavet the name of an operative to the news media. He did it because he wanted to "get" her husband. As to the fact that she was not operating in the field at the time - that fact may have saved her life - but she will never be able to be a field operative again because a federal employee (ROVE) couldn't keep his mouth shut about a government secret.

He should be fired.

The fact that he hasn't been says a lot about his boss, who ought to be doing the firing. And none of it good.

Rove gavet the name of an operative to the news media. He did it because he wanted to "get" her husband. As to the fact that she was not operating in the field at the time - that fact may have saved her life - but she will never be able to be a field operative again because a federal employee (ROVE) couldn't keep his mouth shut about a government secret.

He should be fired.

The fact that he hasn't been says a lot about his boss, who ought to be doing the firing. And none of it good.
You see? This is the sort of ideological, knee-jerk, convict-first-try-afterward response to which I was referring. Sad. Very sad.

You see? This is the sort of ideological, knee-jerk, convict-first-try-afterward response to which I was referring. Sad. Very sad.

Can you blame people for feeling somewhat angry? I'm led to believe that for at least 50% of Americans, this is an extremely important issue with greater ramifications.

You see? This is the sort of ideological, knee-jerk, convict-first-try-afterward response to which I was referring. Sad. Very sad.This was not an ideological, knee-jerk, convict-first-try-afterward response. It was simply a statment of several facts, and my conclusion.

Rove has admitted giving out the operatives name.
That's the only salient fact in the entire mess.
He should be fired.
He hasn't been.

And we all know who should be doing the firing.

Guilty of lying? Do you mean perjury? Has he been convicted of that? I seriously doubt that you have some inside knowledge of this case, or that you are a witness of some sort for the prosecuter, so try not to play partisan games.

If I had meant perjury, I would have said perjury.

Lying is not perjury.

As I said, Rove has lied about his role. Multiple times. We still don't know what his role was exactly, but we know his own version of his role has changed over time.

OJ is not guilty, as is Bill (he was only guilty of loving America too much :rolleyes: ) Since I thought you were some ambulance chaser to begin with, I thought you would know the difference between being found "not guilty" and actually being "innocent".

If you are innocent until proven guilty and you are not found guilty, then you are ________.

I thought you'd try to find a way to make that gate swing only your way. Nice try.

I am glad we can agree that O.J. Simpson, Bill Clinton, and others are innocent. :D

They were acquitted of charges.

Very Angry Rabbits:

This was not an ideological, knee-jerk, convict-first-try-afterward response. It was simply a statment of several facts, and my conclusion.

Rove has admitted giving out the operatives name.
That's the only salient fact in the entire mess.
He should be fired.
He hasn't been.

And we all know who should be doing the firing.

Prove it originated from Rove. From what I'm concerned, no one has actually proved to me that Rove leaked it. In fact since there is plenty of evidence to prove otherwise, if this was tried in a court room it would get tossed out on lack of evidence and the judge would laugh at your face.

So yes, a very ideological, inherently incorrect response. Several facts? What facts? Are you working with the investigation?

They were acquitted of charges.

Very Angry Rabbits:



Prove it originated from Rove. From what I'm concerned, no one has actually proved to me that Rove leaked it. In fact since there is plenty of evidence to prove otherwise, if this was tried in a court room it would get tossed out on lack of evidence and the judge would laugh at your face.

So yes, a very ideological, inherently incorrect response. Several facts? What facts? Are you working with the investigation?I don't have to prove it originated from Rove. Rove already admitted it.

I don't have to prove it originated from Rove. Rove already admitted it.

No. Rove admitted that he was asked about it, and that Novak gave him a name. It was already public. All he said was that "he heard about it".

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/07/16/columnist_told_him_cia_agents_name_rove_said/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+National+News

It wasn't the other way around. Sorry. You misread stories. If anything, Novak should be brought before a judge.

Like he said...

About what I expected from you, sadly. You can be quite lucid when you aren't being knee-jerk with your prejudices.
Don't fucking patronize me, and don't act all holier than thou as though you're deigning to bless us with your faux-moderation. You're as much a hack as Corneliu or any of those other non-thinkers. I gave you credit for being better than that because you didn't make an ass of yourself defending Rove in that other thread, and I complimented you for that, saying that you were American before being a partisan.

I see now I was wrong, and I stand corrected. You're no better than Limbaugh, a man who would sell out his country's national security rather than criticize a spokesman for his own party.

COMMENTARY: I've purposely been holding off until the dust settled a bit on the Carl Rove "outting" of CIA employee Valerie Wilson.

I believe her name is Valerie Plame, so I'll take that as the first clue that this article is B.S.! Oh, and it's Karl Rove.

It would be logical to name it the Not-a-gate scandal, but I prefer a bilingual variation. It may someday make a good trivia question:

What do you call a scandal that's not scandalous?

Nadagate.


Oh kewl, a game the Clintons could play too! :rolleyes:

No. Rove admitted that he was asked about it, and that Novak gave him a name. It was already public. All he said was that "he heard about it".

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/07/16/columnist_told_him_cia_agents_name_rove_said/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+National+News

It wasn't the other way around. Sorry. You misread stories. If anything, Novak should be brought before a judge.
Rove's still not off the hook, even if Plame's name and picture were being broadcast on the big screen in Times Square. Why? Because the US Code says that classified information remains classified until it is declassified, no matter if it's public knowledge or not, and what's more--and this is from the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement Briefing Booklet (http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/sf312.html): However, before disseminating the information elsewhere or confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, further dissemination of the information or confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.
In short, even if all Rove did was confirm Novak's story--and there's still precious little reason to believe that's all he did--he still had the responsibility not only to not confirm the story, but was supposed to actively discover whether or not the information was still classified. He's still on the hook for the disclosure.

Sorry, Rove defenders--your guy is still a scumbag.

Don't think so, nazz. Rove didn't commit any wrong-doing. You only have sour grapes because he help defeat John Kerry in the election. First off, Rove said he "heard about it", he never confirmed it. The true scum bags are the democrats who think guilty until proven innocent is appropriate.

You dems are in serious trouble. Get your acts together before you start mudslinging falsehoods.

The true scum bags are the democrats who think guilty until proven innocent is appropriate.

I do recall a certain business with a man named Clinton...

Don't jump on a high horse dude. You might fall off.

They were acquitted of charges.

That is simply a legality, not always a reality. I'm sure any lawyer can tell you, perhaps our own Cat-Tribe can back me on this?

If you're acquitted of a charge you're found "not guilty" you're however not found "innocent" either. All an acquittal sometimes can mean is they couldn't prove their case or there were morons on the jury, it certainly doesn't automatically make them "innocent"! No one has ever come back with a verdict of "innocent" they have come back with verdicts of "not guilty" though, and if you understand the legal process, you would also understand the profound difference in the two.

Don't think so, nazz. Rove didn't commit any wrong-doing. You only have sour grapes because he help defeat John Kerry in the election. First off, Rove said he "heard about it", he never confirmed it. The true scum bags are the democrats who think guilty until proven innocent is appropriate.

You dems are in serious trouble. Get your acts together before you start mudslinging falsehoods.
Dude--read the emails, read the reports from Rove's own lawyer. The latest spin is that Novak asked Rove about it and Rove confirmed--that's still against the law. That's not left-wing spin--that's Rove's own lawyer. And even if he manages to get out of it with Novak, the Cooper email still has Rove discussing classified material.

But why am I wasting my time with you? I could give you film footage of Rove wiping his diarrhea-dripping ass with the Constitution and burning the Declaration of Independence to kill the smell and you'd still consider him a patriot. :rolleyes:

Hey Nazz, why are you so angry?

Why do you hate America?

Dude--read the emails, read the reports from Rove's own lawyer. The latest spin is that Novak asked Rove about it and Rove confirmed--that's still against the law. That's not left-wing spin--that's Rove's own lawyer. And even if he manages to get out of it with Novak, the Cooper email still has Rove discussing classified material.

But why am I wasting my time with you? I could give you film footage of Rove wiping his diarrhea-dripping ass with the Constitution and burning the Declaration of Independence to kill the smell and you'd still consider him a patriot. :rolleyes:

Email evidence is extremely hard to prove. Why do you hate America?

Why do you hate America?

Hate Rove= Hate the US?

America is nice, try nt to mix the two up buddy.

If he's a USian
"The proper duty of a patriot is to protect his country from it's government"

Hey Nazz, why are you so angry?

Why do you hate America?
:rolleyes:

To quote Jack Palance, "I shit bigger than you." Run home to mama now, like a good kid.

I said acquitted, not innocent. I don't believe OJ is innocent. But he was acquitted of the charges.

Dude--read the emails, read the reports from Rove's own lawyer. The latest spin is that Novak asked Rove about it and Rove confirmed--that's still against the law. That's not left-wing spin--that's Rove's own lawyer. And even if he manages to get out of it with Novak, the Cooper email still has Rove discussing classified material.

But why am I wasting my time with you? I could give you film footage of Rove wiping his diarrhea-dripping ass with the Constitution and burning the Declaration of Independence to kill the smell and you'd still consider him a patriot. :rolleyes:

Great way to twist things to fit your own beliefs. I in fact have read the reports and the emails and they should no wrong doing. In fact the fact that Novak asked isn't spin, it is proven fact. And it isn't against the law as Rove didn't confirm it.

You are the one who needs serious help in your own faulty argument. You are the one who needs to understand that it is "innocent till proven guilty", not "guilty till proven innocent". You are nothing more then someone with sour grapes about a man who did nothing wrong.

Wurzel: I didn't support the impeachment of Clinton. So watch where you step. You are on a slippery slope.

Hey Nazz, why are you so angry?

Why do you hate America?

I've said it once to you and I'll say it again.. The Nazz by reading his/her? posts loves their country more than I've ever seen in your posts. You only care about your partisan hackery, where as if you read The Nazz's posts they seem to actually truly care about the country.. The United States of America, that is inclusive, not only good Christian republicans need apply as you spout.

If it was my country I'd be fucking angry too. The United States use to be a country we all looked up towards. That beacon on the hill.. the shining example of freedom. Now? Pfft! No one looks up to America, your freedoms are being taken away faster than Watergate was exposed and it's just so freaking sad to watch. And only getting worse! Very Sad!

Great way to twist things to fit your own beliefs. I in fact have read the reports and the emails and they should no wrong doing. In fact the fact that Novak asked isn't spin, it is proven fact. And it isn't against the law as Rove didn't confirm it.

You are the one who needs serious help in your own faulty argument. You are the one who needs to understand that it is "innocent till proven guilty", not "guilty till proven innocent". You are nothing more then someone with sour grapes about a man who did nothing wrong.
There are none so blind as those who will not see. If you've actually read the evidence that has been published thus far, there is no possible way that you think that Rove isn't involved in this. He's admitted as much. Not my fault that you've got an obvious blind spot.

I've said it once to you and I'll say it again.. The Nazz by reading his/her? posts loves their country more than I've ever seen in your posts. You only care about your partisan hackery, where as if you read The Nazz's posts they seem to actually truly care about the country.. The United States of America, that is inclusive, not only good Christian republicans need apply as you spout.

If it was my country I'd be fucking angry too. The United States use to be a country we all looked up towards. That beacon on the hill.. the shining example of freedom. Now? Pfft! No one looks up to America, your freedoms are being taken away faster than Watergate was exposed and it's just so freaking sad to watch. And only getting worse! Very Sad!

What B.S.

I'm sorry.. but he loves his country just like I do. I'm fucking angry at the people spreading nonsense on the internet... awful rhetoric that seeks to divide this nation. This has nothing to do with watergate. In fact, I think you people need to grow up and stop spewing BS. Sheesh. Shame on you!

There are none so blind as those who will not see. If you've actually read the evidence that has been published thus far, there is no possible way that you think that Rove isn't involved in this. He's admitted as much. Not my fault that you've got an obvious blind spot.

Won't see what? Your own blind delusions? What you want to be the reality? You can wish and want, but you won't get. You can try to make these delusions reality, but it isn't going to happen because it didn't occur that way. Rove is not guilty, he didn't do anything wrong. You are the one with an obvious blind spot, and delusions.

DING! Oh, there's the bell-he has tagged out ladies and gentlemen. Well, you gotta respect that haggling the definition of 'is' is a somthing only a truly skilled orator can handle. It's so disapointing though to see someone tap out with the 'Why do you hate America' so early in the match-you had to expect them to come with more, but it's really hard to defend a guy who first said he had no involvement and is now saying he was only a little involved-it takes some real skills and huge balls to try and act inocent or deserving of trust after such a petty game with the American public has been played. Well, that looks like thats it from the BH, though I expect some post game flopping about, of course after the WDYHA? tap out no one takes that seriously...

I thought this was some silly forum where wannabes try to have intelligent debates from the comfort of their mom's basement. Tag out? Wow, didn't realize I stumbled into the WWE website.

Won't see what? Your own blind delusions? What you want to be the reality? You can wish and want, but you won't get. You can try to make these delusions reality, but it isn't going to happen because it didn't occur that way. Rove is not guilty, he didn't do anything wrong. You are the one with an obvious blind spot, and delusions.
Show don't tell. Nazz put up the evidence, show where it's wrong don't tell me it's wrong and expect me to believe it because you said he's blind.

Show don't tell. Nazz put up the evidence, show where it's wrong don't tell me it's wrong and expect me to believe it because you said he's blind.

I shown plenty of counter links. Nazz didn't post anything of relevance... give me some god damn evidence to show that Rove is guilty of a crime, not some skewed rhetoric.

What B.S.

I'm sorry.. but he loves his country just like I do. I'm fucking angry at the people spreading nonsense on the internet... awful rhetoric that seeks to divide this nation. This has nothing to do with watergate. In fact, I think you people need to grow up and stop spewing BS. Sheesh. Shame on you!


Steph can't help it. She is Canadian afterall, and as we all know that Canadian Nationalism is Anti-Americanism at best. It is sad that the CBC can brainwash it's citizens so easily. There was a time when Canadians were much like children, seen but not heard.

Never thought sour grapes could screw up the logic of otherwise intelligent people this badly..

You know what--if any of you people really want proof, go to the Rove=National Hero? thread. It's all been hashed out there, and personally, I don't give enough of a shit about insulting little pricks like Big Haliburton and willfully blind posters like Myrmidonisia to go through it again.

Big Haliburton--a little piece of advice. If you really want to have a serious conversation, then try conversing instead of being a prick.

Here ya go. (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=metaphor)

Now get out of your moms basement, she's got laundry to do.

Hmm...You happen to be the one with over 6,000 posts. Me thinks you need a date.

What B.S.

I'm sorry.. but he loves his country just like I do. I'm fucking angry at the people spreading nonsense on the internet... awful rhetoric that seeks to divide this nation. This has nothing to do with watergate. In fact, I think you people need to grow up and stop spewing BS. Sheesh. Shame on you!

No, you're right! It's far, far worse than Watergate ever was! Some of us on this forum are old enough to remember Watergate, it wasn't like this. You want to stop the divisions in America? Stop the freaking partisan hackery!

All I ever hear from the republicans now is religious this and that, no choice for women, no equal rights for gay/les couples, it reminds me of back in the day when interracial marriage was illegal too.

All I hear when republicans lips are moving is constant spouting of "religious/family values" Well I have news for you! Hate is not a family value!

Karl Rove is a snake in the grass who from the very start of his career worked in a low underhanded way, it's always been this way with Rove. For christ sakes, look it up! (see: Bush's Brain) This guy would walk on you, not over you, but on you and never look back and you all sit here and defend him. You know why? Because I'd say 80% of you probably haven't a clue of is career as a whole, if you did, you'd know this has Rove's finger-prints all over it!

Don't give The Nazz a hard time because he just happens to know more, a hell of a lot more about Rove than you!

:rolleyes:

To quote Jack Palance, "I shit bigger than you." Run home to mama now, like a good kid.

Well, instead of following the Michael Moore diet, get some decent fiber and eat seven servings of fresh fruit and veggies a day. After a month, you'll notice your feces aren't nearly as big. ;)

BTW are you 12?

Hmm...You happen to be the one with over 6,000 posts. Me thinks you need a date.
me think you = http://www.geelongartsalliance.org/past_events/stocking_filler/sock_puppet_one.gif

No, you're right! It's far, far worse than Watergate ever was! Some of us on this forum are old enough to remember Watergate, it wasn't like this. You want to stop the divisions in America? Stop the freaking partisan hackery!

All I ever hear from the republicans now is religious this and that, no choice for women, no equal rights for gay/les couples, it reminds me of back in the day when interracial marriage was illegal too.

What B.S. This isn't even close to Watergate. In fact I think it is Mediagate, because the media is the one criminally liable for this. Not Rove, and certainly not the Bush adminstration.

You need to get off your own partisan hackery, and act your age. The slippery slope arguments just don't fly anymore. Especially not in this day and time.


Karl Rove is a snake in the grass who from the very start of his career worked in a low underhanded way, it's always been this way with Rove. For christ sakes, look it up! (see: Bush's Brain) This guy would walk on you, not over you, but on you and never look back and you all sit here and defend him. You know why? Because I'd say 80% of you probably haven't a clue of is career as a whole, if you did, you'd know this has Rove's finger-prints all over it!

Don't give The Nazz a hard time because he just happens to know more, a hell of a lot more about Rove than you!

yak yak yak yak.. and you talk about Partisan hackery. You are the biggest partisan I've seen here as of yet. You are full of division and you would rather want to see the US collapse. Well to hell with you.

I need to go now and finish up some work. So I'll be on some other time. In the mean time, examine your own BS and try to reconsider how you state things. For goodness sakes, you talk about being against partisan politics, but look at yourself.

Your mouth is filthy.

No, you're right! It's far, far worse than Watergate ever was! Some of us on this forum are old enough to remember Watergate, it wasn't like this. You want to stop the divisions in America? Stop the freaking partisan hackery!

All I ever hear from the republicans now is religious this and that, no choice for women, no equal rights for gay/les couples, it reminds me of back in the day when interracial marriage was illegal too.

All I hear when republicans lips are moving is constant spouting of "religious/family values" Well I have news for you! Hate is not a family value!

Karl Rove is a snake in the grass who from the very start of his career worked in a low underhanded way, it's always been this way with Rove. For christ sakes, look it up! (see: Bush's Brain) This guy would walk on you, not over you, but on you and never look back and you all sit here and defend him. You know why? Because I'd say 80% of you probably haven't a clue of is career as a whole, if you did, you'd know this has Rove's finger-prints all over it!

Don't give The Nazz a hard time because he just happens to know more, a hell of a lot more about Rove than you!

Steph, whoa calm down, you know that stress isn't good for the complexion.

Besides, this story is dead. Get over it.

I shown plenty of counter links. Nazz didn't post anything of relevance... give me some god damn evidence to show that Rove is guilty of a crime, not some skewed rhetoric.
I can only find one posting here, this one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9264103&postcount=55), of you posting 'plenty of counter links,' which would be one.

And in that counter-link you get the following:
Rove said in a television interview about Plame last summer that, ''I didn't know her name and didn't leak her name." Now, by his own admission, Rove knew of the name from Novak before it was published.
followed by this slippery nonsense-
Robert Luskin, Rove's attorney, said yesterday that Rove's statements were not inconsistent. ''What Karl was trying to suggest was that he didn't know her name until he was told her name by a journalist," Luskin said.
But there is this:
In their conversation, and after Novak laid out his writing plans, the source said, Rove indicated that he, too, had heard about the involvement of Wilson's wife. Rove's comments to Novak seemed to give the columnist at least indirect confirmation of Plame's CIA role.
Remember, this is from your counterlink.

To which The Nazz responded with document evidence of the actual code what is stated above breaks. He has shown me something concrete that is in fact backed up by your own source. All you've given is independent verification of his conclusion and then accusations of willful blindness.

Now, if you'd like to actually demonstrate your case, I'm all ears. Or you can join BH in the cellar, I guess...

To which The Nazz responded with document evidence of the actual code what is stated above breaks. He has shown me something concrete that is in fact backed up by your own source. All you've given is independent verification of his conclusion and then accusations of willful blindness.

Now, if you'd like to actually demonstrate your case, I'm all ears. Or you can join BH in the cellar, I guess...

No, nazz is incapable of proper argument, as are you. Rove committed no wrong doing. And my own source backs up my argument. No fool will take my own source and use it against me. Cannot happen.

Besides, this story is dead. Get over it.

In your Republican dreams it is, think again, it's just getting started! Watch and see, Zeppistan and I and many others on this forum told you all before the invasion of Iraq what was going to happen, and we were laughed off by a lot of you, well looky, looky, we turned out to be correct!

So, when we turn out to be correct on this too, I'll spare you the "we told you so" because you'll know we did!

As for the person who believes "Big Haliburton" is a puppet, you bet your ass he is! If not a puppet than a former deleted nation. He has went on far too much with me about my husband Zep, who hasn't posted on this forum as my husband Zeppistan in many months. Of course he's a puppet and I have a pretty good idea of who.

Now ya'll have a nice evening, I'm going to watch a movie.

I can only find one posting here, this one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9264103&postcount=55), of you posting 'plenty of counter links,' which would be one.

And in that counter-link you get the following:

followed by this slippery nonsense-

But there is this:

Remember, this is from your counterlink.

To which The Nazz responded with document evidence of the actual code what is stated above breaks. He has shown me something concrete that is in fact backed up by your own source. All you've given is independent verification of his conclusion and then accusations of willful blindness.

Now, if you'd like to actually demonstrate your case, I'm all ears. Or you can join BH in the cellar, I guess...

It is not "document evidence". This is the internet, not the courtroom.

How is the cellar at your mom's house? Has the BK called back from when you went there for that application last week?

In your Republican dreams it is, think again, it's just getting started! Watch and see, Zeppistan and I and many others on this forum told you all before the invasion of Iraq what was going to happen, and we were laughed off by a lot of you, well looky, looky, we turned out to be correct!

You and many others told you what was going to happen in Iraq? you people can't formulate a proper argument. The war was correct, and this issue is overblown, like the Rathergate incident you people wanted to be true.


So, when we turn out to be correct on this too, I'll spare you the "we told you so" because you'll know we did!

No as usual you'll be dead wrong. As you were in the Rathergate incident.

In your Republican dreams it is, think again, it's just getting started! Watch and see, Zeppistan and I and many others on this forum told you all before the invasion of Iraq what was going to happen, and we were laughed off by a lot of you, well looky, looky, we turned out to be correct!

So, when we turn out to be correct on this too, I'll spare you the "we told you so" because you'll know we did!

As for the person who believes "Big Haliburton" is a puppet, you bet your ass he is! If not a puppet than a former deleted nation. He has went on far too much with me about my husband Zep, who hasn't posted on this forum as my husband Zeppistan in many months. Of course he's a puppet and I have a pretty good idea of who.

Now ya'll have a nice evening, I'm going to watch a movie.

Holy cow, ya have it all figured out! I know what your problem really is: By the looks of that photo of you with "Zep", you are just so hateful that you live in Canada, and can't get a decent tan. Tsk, Tsk.

BTW-Wilson was the one who set this all up. It is a dead story as most of the major media are learning there are other things to report.

http://www.besmark.com/minstrel.jpg

Btw, that's the color you should be going for, not Canadian Corpse.

No, nazz is incapable of proper argument, as are you. Rove committed no wrong doing. And my own source backs up my argument. No fool will take my own source and use it against me. Cannot happen.
Your source-
In their conversation, and after Novak laid out his writing plans, the source said, Rove indicated that he, too, had heard about the involvement of Wilson's wife. Rove's comments to Novak seemed to give the columnist at least indirect confirmation of Plame's CIA role.
Nazz' post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9264267&postcount=59) that links to the handbook that states-
However, before disseminating the information elsewhere or confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, further dissemination of the information or confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.

So then is your defense that since it was 'at least indirect' that it is a non-issue?

And perhaps you'd like to address the "I didn't know her name/I didn't know her name until" word play in the article, perhaps explain why he would still have credibility with that kind of thing? If he didn't do anything wrong, why not be upfront about his involvement when asked in 2003?

Now again I ask, no plead-your argument please-not an accusation of blindness or other such insult.

Holy cow, ya have it all figured out! I know what your problem really is: By the looks of that photo of you with "Zep", you are just so hateful that you live in Canada, and can't get a decent tan. Tsk, Tsk.

Yeah, you got me, totally busted.. I was hoping for skin Cancer, but it just doesn't look like it's happening for me.. How bitter I must be! :rolleyes:

Now I'm going to go watch a movie, enjoy your evening.

Now again I ask, no plead-your argument please-not an accusation of blindness or other such insult.

I'm still waiting for an actual argument that Rove is guilty, not partisan hackery. Thanks.

I'm still waiting for an actual argument that Rove is guilty, not partisan hackery. Thanks.
So thats a no then? We can disregard your input on the matter.

So thats a no then? We can disregard your input on the matter.

No. I'm still waiting for an argument. You will not disregard anything. you guys are twisting the facts.

No. I'm still waiting for an argument. You will not disregard anything. you guys are twisting the facts.
Well then untwist them. I have been more than fair, but the only thing you've provided are insults and an article that backs up the claims made by Nazz. Unless you provide something more substantial I'm not going to leap to your side because you badger me to. Put up or shut up, to put it bluntly. I have tried to give you a fair shake and all you've given me is AM radio belegerance. If you've got no more to offer than I can move on an address posters who might actually offer insight.

I'm not going to pretend to be a mod, but my psychic powers tell me you will get banned, hopefully CPU banned. So I'm hoping you see this before you do, so you can give me a quick little roast. <3

As per bolded: WTF?

hahaha I laugh at such threats, and at losers like you.

Holy cow, ya have it all figured out! I know what your problem really is: By the looks of that photo of you with "Zep", you are just so hateful that you live in Canada, and can't get a decent tan. Tsk, Tsk.

BTW-Wilson was the one who set this all up. It is a dead story as most of the major media are learning there are other things to report.

http://www.besmark.com/minstrel.jpg

Btw, that's the color you should be going for, not Canadian Corpse.
Ah...Johnny Wadd/HannibalSmith. I knew it was you, I just didn't have the patience to goad you into calling someone a 'pencil necked geek.'

BTW-Wilson was the one who set this all up. It is a dead story as most of the major media are learning there are other things to report.

http://www.besmark.com/minstrel.jpg

Btw, that's the color you should be going for, not Canadian Corpse.

That's outright offensive to quite a few people. I'd say you're in for a forumban. These past few pages have been bad, but this is above all of it.

Ok look. I got some things I have to do.

As per bolded: WTF?

hahaha I laugh at such threats, and at losers like you.

Yah, I was going to try and edit is so it was more clear. Can you put some more effort into your insult, though? I find it disappointingly lacking. (If it's good, I'll put it in my signature.)

And as I said, I wasn't threatening, I was predicting. This entire thread is becoming a flame war, more so than most religious threads... I just find that pretty amusing.

That's outright offensive to quite a few people. I'd say you're in for a forumban. These past few pages have been bad, but this is above all of it.

What's wrong with a little blackface humor? Can't handle it? You have to be a little tougher if you want to make it in the real world. Go cry to momma.

Ah...Johnny Wadd/HannibalSmith. I knew it was you, I just didn't have the patience to goad you into calling someone a 'pencil necked geek.'

Hahaha, funny, that's exactly who I was thinking too. Go figure! ;)

But yes I have to agree BH did cross the line with that... that's offensive...

losers like you.

Quick, get water!

FLAMES!

Ah...Johnny Wadd/HannibalSmith. I knew it was you, I just didn't have the patience to goad you into calling someone a 'pencil necked geek.'


You should really try to figure out some of my earlier incarnations before the Smith days. There were many.

BTW:It took people long enough. You Faulknerian Idiot Man-Child.

Pencil-neck geek was much later in the MCMM days.

What's wrong with a little blackface humor? Can't handle it? You have to be a little tougher if you want to make it in the real world. Go cry to momma.

The answer is obvious. It is a stereotypical image racially insulting to blacks. It's the same as the drawings of the Jews in Der Giftpilz.

My apologies, but I can handle it. That doesn't make it right or acceptable.

BTW:It took people long enough. You Faulknerian Idiot Man-Child.

Pencil-neck geek was much later in the MCMM days.

FLAMES.... somethings/people never change! Oh and for me, it didn't take very long to figure out who you were.. I was a Game Mod for almost two years here. I know your ways. Insult, flame, troll, flamebait, etc, etc, and you do it in a very unique style that is all your own!.

Quick, get water!

FLAMES!

Sorry Steph, but in order to be cool, you have to live a cool life. You, my friend are from Canaduh, thus are not even able to logically comprehend what is going on. Go club a seal, or better yet let a seal club the ugly out of you. Now run home to Mr Clean and CRY!

The answer is obvious. It is a stereotypical image racially insulting to blacks. It's the same as the drawings of the Jews in Der Giftpilz.

My apologies, but I can handle it. That doesn't make it right or acceptable.

Blackface is an extremely funny artform. I just dig it...."MAMMY!" Priceless...

Sorry Steph, but in order to be cool, you have to live a cool life. You, my friend are from Canaduh, thus are not even able to logically comprehend what is going on. Go club a seal, or better yet let a seal club the ugly out of you. Now run home to Mr Clean and CRY!

So, just so we know, after you get deleted this time, what name will your new nation be?

Thanks in advance!

FLAMES.... somethings/people never change! Oh and for me, it didn't take very long to figure out who you were.. I was a Game Mod for almost two years here. I know your ways. Insult, flame, troll, flamebait, etc, etc, and you do it in a very unique style that is all your own!.


Yeah, I remember your Faulknerian moderation skills. You were and are still a blundering moron, and yes a pencil-necked geek. Tell your girly-manish hubby to grow some hair. He ain't a negro, and thus it ain't cool.

So, just so we know, after you get deleted this time, what name will your new nation be?

Thanks in advance!


I'm thinking of going latin or maybe even liberal this time. Look for Carlito, and or RDDB.

I'll drop hints now and again, but I'll hide this time, you'll only realize it's me when you see that pic.

Can't you IP ban the sod?

At least most sites seem to be able to stop people getting back easily.

Blackface is an extremely funny artform. I just dig it...."MAMMY!" Priceless...

So will your IP banning be.

Can't you IP ban the sod?

At least most sites seem to be able to stop people getting back easily.

The issue is he could have a dynamic IP address.. making it impossible.

Can't you IP ban the sod?

At least most sites seem to be able to stop people getting back easily.


To quote Mr. Han "I'm afraid you'll find that quite impossible!"

Maybe Steph and her hubby with all of those awards and such on their walls, can figure out a way.

So will your IP banning be.

I received an ip ban before, oops here I am.

Yeah, I remember your Faulknerian moderation skills. You were and are still a blundering moron, and yes a pencil-necked geek. Tell your girly-manish hubby to grow some hair. He ain't a negro, and thus it ain't cool.

I'm really sorry, I'm an Ex-Moderator now, in case you didn't notice, I quit some months back.. if you're going to commit suicide by mod, you're going to have to find an acting mod. You're barking up the wrong tree here!

The issue is he could have a dynamic IP address.. making it impossible.

Or on several computers, one never knows.

I wish to apologize for being part of this, and apologize for my behavior.

Or on several computers, one never knows.

Your behavior is despicable.

It's Saturday night, and Johnny Wadd obviously doesn't have a date. Again.

I'm really sorry, I'm an Ex-Moderator now, in case you didn't notice, I quit some months back.. if you're going to commit suicide by mod, you're going to have to find an acting mod. You're barking up the wrong tree here!

Duh, thanks for pointing that out to me. Typical Canadian, can't understand anything. I was launching an attack on you, yes a personal attack.

I received an ip ban before, oops here I am.

Well then, you'll just be ignored and fall in to obscurity once again.

It's Saturday night, and Johnny Wadd obviously doesn't have a date. Again.


Hey fruitcake, it's only 5:55pm here, why are you here? Boyfriends anal fissures acting up again?

Gosh, I'm going out. This is getting too much for me. I'm going dancing at a club.. later.

And fruitcake? don't throw that word around!

It's Saturday night, and Johnny Wadd obviously doesn't have a date. Again.

Yeah, he has to troll a thread on Nationstates instead. Really edgy of him trying to get anonymous people he's never met to respond to his pointless drivel.

Gosh, I'm going out. This is getting too much for me. I'm going dancing at a club.. later.


I thought you were straight, not some pudding-pusher. :(

Okay, baby got his bottle. I think any discussion over the return of our trollriffic friend here can probably take place here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432444) in the thread that 'Trusci made asking that this be closed. That way we can move on topic and I might, just might get my wish and someone will explain to me the defense of Rove without the arguement being "Well...d'uh..."

I thought you were straight, not some pudding-pusher. :(

No. I'm very much gay.

That's incredible. Taking issue with someone who said nothing to you.

Well then, you'll just be ignored and fall in to obscurity once again.


Obscurity? Never! I'm the only one pumping life into an otherwise dreadful website.

...and someone will explain to me the defense of Rove without the arguement being "Well...d'uh..."

LOL

No. I'm very much gay.

That's incredible. Taking issue with someone who said nothing to you.

push some pudding for me, hon. have fun.

No. I'm very much gay.

That's incredible. Taking issue with someone who said nothing to you.


See, I'm an equal opportunity jerk. I go after everyone, now you.

Yeah, I remember your Faulknerian moderation skills.

And he thinks I'm the clueless one.. haha Faulkner won the Nobel prize for literature in 1949. I'll take that as a compliment. ;)

push some pudding for me, hon.

Hey, no need to sink to my level, you deviant man-whore.

push some pudding for me, hon.

Oh great. Now I got two people going after me. Brilliant. :mad:

Well, I guess I can't defend Rove nor accuse him without doubt, so I'm on the fence. I'll wait until there is more evidence and I'll make a decision. Still, I think it is at the very least bad form for the Administration to not comment on the situation and stonewall; it makes them look like they're hiding something.

Okay, baby got his bottle. I think any discussion over the return of our trollriffic friend here can probably take place here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432444) in the thread that 'Trusci made asking that this be closed. That way we can move on topic and I might, just might get my wish and someone will explain to me the defense of Rove without the arguement being "Well...d'uh..."


Now, now. No need to report this fun. You are just a tattle-tale.

Oh great. Now I got two people going after me. Brilliant. :mad:

No, no, no. Silly. have fun tonight. It was a well-wishing!

Oh great. Now I got two people going after me. Brilliant. :mad:

I don't think Dobbs is going after you. He wants you to have some fun with good old Johnny Wadd.

No, no, no. Silly. have fun tonight. It was a well-wishing!

Uh... english isn't my first language. I'm not really up to date with figurative language. I don't even know I want to go to those clubs anymore.. eww.. forget it... tigerheat and rage.. eww.. if you know Los Angeles..

He wants you to have some fun with good old Johnny Wadd.

Erm...uh, let's not stretch it, Vetalia.

And he thinks I'm the clueless one.. haha Faulkner won the Nobel prize for literature in 1949. I'll take that as a compliment. ;)


I was using the name in the context of "Faulknerian Idiot Man-Child". You know what that is, right?

Erm...uh, let's not stretch it, Vetalia.

Funny, but the chicks I bang say that all the time.

Well, I guess I can't defend Rove nor accuse him without doubt, so I'm on the fence. I'll wait until there is more evidence and I'll make a decision. Still, I think it is at the very least bad form for the Administration to not comment on the situation and stonewall; it makes them look like they're hiding something.
Agreed on the last bit. Especially when you look at early insistance that they had no involvement. Now they where only 'kinda involved.' That's enough to get a 12 year old sent to his room until he learns a lesson about honesty. While I appriciate and understand that for this there has to be a lot more solid evidence to do anything legal (and am grateful for it, twelve year olds sometimes get sent to thier rooms for nothin') it certainly enough already to seriously question the mans credibility.

Uh... english isn't my first language. I'm not really up to date with figurative language. I don't even know I want to go to those clubs anymore.. eww.. forget it... tigerheat and rage.. eww.. if you know Los Angeles..

I'll come down to LA tonight. I'll show you how to be straight. You'll switch teams tonight, I promise. Bring $100 bucks for your hooker, I'll bring my own and an 8 ball.

eww.. if you know Los Angeles..

I stayed for a week once, during a heatwave. Stayed across the street from MacArthur Park. Nasty heat.

Then again it's pretty rotten right here where I am. Anyway, my dear, have fun wherever you decide to go tonight.

I was using the name in the context of "Faulknerian Idiot Man-Child". You know what that is, right?

Again, I must say sorry. I'm far too educated and well bred to understand your trolling slang. I know of Faulkner, as he was a great writer.

Oh and just out of curiosity, why would you try to equate a woman to a man child? Seems odd.

I stayed for a week once, during a heatwave. Stayed across the street from MacArthur Park. Nasty heat.

Then again it's pretty rotten right here where I am. Anyway, my dear, have fun wherever you decide to go tonight.

Too hot today.. I haven't gone to any clubs in 8 months and don't intend to go back. Just too many bad experiences. I'm just going to watch a DVD with my bf.

Erm...uh, let's not stretch it, Vetalia.

Perhaps it will change him for the better little. Still, I'd stay away from that without proper protection. Like three or four layers.:p

Again, I must say sorry. I'm far too educated and well bred to understand your trolling slang. I know of Faulkner, as he was a great writer.

Oh and just out of curiosity, why would you try to equate a woman to a man child? Seems odd.


You haven't read any of his books then I guess. Your pic makes you look a bit masculine, so who knows.

As per bolded, hahaha. You got one of em edumacations up in Canaduh, eh?

BTW I hope your kids didn't inherit any of your well "bred" ugly genes. Did you fall out of the tree* and hit every branch on the way down?


*Ugly Tree.

I'll come down to LA tonight. I'll show you how to be straight. You'll switch teams tonight, I promise. Bring $100 bucks for your hooker, I'll bring my own and an 8 ball.

Don't think so. I got a boyfriend and am committed. If you want to pay for a hooker, great.. you'll probably get an STD.

You haven't read any of his books then I guess. Your pic makes you look a bit masculine, so who knows.

As per bolded, hahaha. You got one of em edumacations up in Canaduh, eh?

BTW I hope your kids didn't inherit any of your well "bred" ugly genes. Did you fall out of the tree* and hit every branch on the way down?


*Ugly Tree.

Wow, that was deep. "Ugly Tree", wtf? First graders could come up with something better than that. And Canada's got a better educational system than the US.

You haven't read any of his books then I guess. Your pic makes you look a bit masculine, so who knows.

As per bolded, hahaha. You got one of em edumacations up in Canaduh, eh?

BTW I hope your kids didn't inherit any of your well "bred" ugly genes. Did you fall out of the tree* and hit every branch on the way down?


*Ugly Tree.

I don't know where you live, but Canada has one of the highest standards of education in the world. There is nothing wrong with being educated in Canada.

I don't think I look "masculine" but hey, I could be wrong.. ugly tree? Isn't that like grade school talk? I think so.

So, if I'm so ugly, lets trade pics..

Here is mine..I admit it's a little fuzzy, but it's pretty much the most current one I have..

http://www.stephaniesworld.com/Stephistan05.jpg

So, lets see yours? Or are you all talk and no action?

So, lets see yours? Or are you all talk and no action?
Dammit Steph, you know he's just going to post that minstral pic or one of John Holmes.


Bah. I tried.

If that's someone's idea of 'masculine', well...


...and then again, it's Saturday night and the inimitable Mr. Wadd is without a date. The picture becomes a bit more clear.

Nice pic, btw Steph.

Dammit Steph, you know he's just going to post that minstral pic or one of John Holmes.


Bah. I tried.

Ack! I had not thought of that! Sorry!

Nice pic, btw Steph.

Thank you Dobbs! :)

If that's someone's idea of 'masculine', well...
...and then again, it's Saturday night and the inimitable Mr. Wadd is without a date. The picture becomes a bit more clear.

Yes, his sharp satire and unparalleled wit (love that "Ugly Tree" bit) combined with sound social skills assure his success with women.

Ack! I had not thought of that! Sorry!
It's moot now, the hammer fell (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9265015&postcount=13).

And yeah, you're hot. I'm still waiting for that adoption-I'm fairly certain we can skirt around that technicality that I'm a year older than you. I just want to be Canadian and I don't have $10 grand...

It's moot now, the hammer fell (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9265015&postcount=13).

And yeah, you're hot. I'm still waiting for that adoption-I'm fairly certain we can skirt around that technicality that I'm a year older than you. I just want to be Canadian and I don't have $10 grand...

But I'm already married, we'd have to adopt you or something, how fast can you get to China, I hear adopting from there is really easy..lol. ;)

But I'm already married, we'd have to adopt you or something, how fast can you get to China, I hear adopting from there is really easy..lol. ;)
I know, I said adopt. I don't mind having to call Zepp daddy. It's a more apealling option than plan B (A friend marries this chick he knows who is looking for American citizenship, they do the dual thing and naturalize in their respective countries, divorce, and then since you all legalized gay marriage I...dammit...marry him. Now, I'm secure enough in my own sexuality but the lengthy phone calls explaining this and insisting to my parents that, no I'm not gay and this is not why I didn't want to go to high school dances would just be too much.)

So adopt me. I'm a big norwegian and irish dude, not gonna pass for Chinese anytime soon, unfortunately.

lol, does anyone else find the seemingly mass migration northward funny?

Mexicans are trying to get into America, and Americans are trying to get into Canada...

Canada must be a hell of a place to live...

You guys should feel special that we all want to come there...or scared...

some of the people I know here would make me want to move if I knew they were going to come live near me(oh wait, they already do)

lol, does anyone else find the seemingly mass migration northward funny?

Mexicans are trying to get into America, and Americans are trying to get into Canada...

Canada must be a hell of a place to live...

You guys should feel special that we all want to come there...or scared...

some of the people I know here would make me want to move if I knew they were going to come live near me(oh wait, they already do)
We ran out of 'west' to go so now we go up.

Get ready, penguins. Here the misfits come...

Get ready, penguins. Here the misfits come...

You DO know that we have 4 seasons right? Our summers get as hot as any American city. Winter does suck.. but that is only one out of the 4. Spring is a little rainy and muddy, but it's beautiful, tree blossoms, flowers coming out after a 4 month slumber.. summer can get too hot, yay for A/C! Fall is also very beautiful, all the colours on the trees, the weather is pretty nice right up until around Christmas. It's really only Jan. and Feb. that are not fit for humans..lol The rest of our weather is very nice and perfectly livable!

Ok, so no China huh.. I will have to consult Zep on a country that we could sponsor you from, given your physical attributes..lol. :cool:

You DO know that we have 4 seasons right? Our summers get as hot as any American city. Winter does suck.. but that is only one out of the 4. Spring is a little rainy and muddy, but it's beautiful, tree blossoms, flowers coming out after a 4 month slumber.. summer can get too hot, yay for A/C! Fall is also very beautiful, all the colours on the trees, the weather is pretty nice right up until around Christmas. It's really only Jan. and Feb. that are not fit for humans..lol The rest of our weather is very nice and perfectly livable!

Ok, so no China huh.. I will have to consult Zep on a country that we could sponsor you from, given your physical attributes..lol. :cool:
I wasn't trying to say that all Canada was penguin country, just that the misfits will run out of north quicker than we ran out of west.

I live on the coast of California, we get 2 1/2 seasons...Summer, not Summer, and 'hey, what's with the rain?' Or, if you're a surfer big swell season and not so big swell season.

No. Rove admitted that he was asked about it, and that Novak gave him a name. It was already public. All he said was that "he heard about it".

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/07/16/columnist_told_him_cia_agents_name_rove_said/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+National+News

It wasn't the other way around. Sorry. You misread stories. If anything, Novak should be brought before a judge.I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is...

Steph, if for some reason you become single again, you have a suitor in California!

I'm a sucker for hot edumucated women.

It's called "ideological pigheadedness," and it's catching! Ick!

Ya. Doesn't it suck when people refuse to accept your position just because you have no real evidence and your position is so vile that anyone with a shred of sense or morality would go into fits of revulsion before accepting your rediculous proposition? People should be more sheep-like. Mutton is so easy to make out of them.

Ya. Doesn't it suck when people refuse to accept your position just because you have no real evidence and your position is so vile that anyone with a shred of sense or morality would go into fits of revulsion before accepting your rediculous proposition? People should be more sheep-like. Mutton is so easy to make out of them.
And he doesn't even read the articles he posts, else he would know how to correctly spell Karl Rove. It just solidifies my point that the less people know about the Bush Administration, the more they support it and the more people know, the more they despise it.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!!!1!1