Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder Ever since late last week, and especially since Chris Matthews of Hardball went on Weird Don Imus's show last Friday and said it "could be today", rumors are flying around the Internet about Patrick Fitzgerald finally indicting Karl Rove. Fitzgerald has said nothing publicly about it and neither has Rove, but that hasn't stopped people from talking about nor making posts about it, kinda like mine here. What follows here is a typical link from a Google search. <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/21/msnbcs-shuster-signs-point-to-rove-indictment/" target="_blank">http://thinkprogress.org/2006/ 04/21/msnbcs-shuster-signs-point-to-rove-indictment/</a> An interesting twist is that some believe Rove started the rumor himself, so when nothing happens or he is cleared, he can come out smelling like a rose, so to speak. Apparently he's done things like that before, like projecting a $550 billion problem when in reality it was $400 billion, which still would be bad but can be painted as a victory of sorts. Time will tell.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Mr. Fitzgerald isn't going to indict Mr. Rove. David Shuster is an irresponsible reporter given to partisan panting.
Originally Posted By PsylocibeFrog oh course bush will pardon his good propaganda minister Rove, after all the guy got bush into office by smearing and ruining everyone else.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "Mr. Fitzgerald isn't going to indict Mr. Rove. David Shuster is an irresponsible reporter given to partisan panting." Can you smear Chris Matthews as well and make it two for two?
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder Another classy Karl Rove moment from today: >Rove accused the news media of being too fixated on polls. "I love this mania which has swept through American media today which substitutes polls for coverage of substance," he said. "There's, I'm sure, going to be a special Betty Ford addiction for those that are addicted to regular poll numbers, but you'll work your way through it," he said, referring to the former first lady's clinic for treating substance abuse.< I'm sure former President Ford and his wife appreciate the sensitivity shown here.
Originally Posted By ecdc "Mr. Fitzgerald isn't going to indict Mr. Rove. David Shuster is an irresponsible reporter given to partisan panting." Shoot the messenger, eh? I so, so love it. When Bush's numbers were up, all we heard was how out of touch Democrats were (and in many ways, it's true) and that Americans supported the President and they "got it." Now, it's just the bias of the media that's responsible. Anything and everything to absolve one of the worst administrations of any responsibility. Katrina? Local officials fault. Iraq? Naysayers are bringing down our troops. Gas prices? Don't point a finger at the giant oil companies who continue to post record profits. The environment? At first global warming didn't exist. Turns out it does, it's just not our fault. The planet naturally goes through stages like this. That's why glaciers that have been around for millennia are now gone. Yeah, right.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Can you smear Chris Matthews as well and make it two for two?> Is the definition of "smearing" now pointing out the facts about someone? Because I can back up what I said about Mr Shuster. Unlike, of course, your allegations against Mr Rove.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Shoot the messenger, eh?> When the messenger gets it wrong so often that it appears willful, then maybe it's appropriate to shoot them. As to the rest of your comments, I guess your desire to blame President Bush for any perceived ills outweighs your desire to examine the facts of each situation.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder I sense a "Betty Ford" addiction to always defending Karl Rove.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "<Can you smear Chris Matthews as well and make it two for two?> Is the definition of "smearing" now pointing out the facts about someone? Because I can back up what I said about Mr Shuster. Unlike, of course, your allegations against Mr Rove." So you can't smear Matthews then? And it sure seems like nobody needs help smearing Rove. He's doing fine all by himself. Meanwhile, Karl serenely goes about his business: <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1963733" target="_blank">http://abcnews.go.com/Politics /wireStory?id=1963733</a>
Originally Posted By Beaumandy I find it interesting that anyone would even advance a story like this when there is once again no evidence, no facts, nothing to prove it's true. It's this type of behavior that has made the American people not trust the libreral media. However, it's the constant assault of bogus stories, like this one, that have made the uninformed and cluless in our society have negative feelings about the president. I can prove this. Just ask anyone who wants to smear the President why they don't like him and what they base their opinions on. It takes ussually about 2 minutes of counter questions for the Bush hater to collapse and for them to start with snarky, no substance putdowns.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Shooba >>It takes ussually about 2 minutes of counter questions for the Bush hater to collapse and for them to start with snarky, no substance putdowns<< >>You can put it into the conspiracy trash heap they have going on back behind the bath house. The Bush haters LIVE in a world of conspiracies.<< >>However, it's the constant assault of bogus stories, like this one, that have made the uninformed and cluless in our society have negative feelings about the president.<<
Originally Posted By Beaumandy I stand behind all those statements Shooba. They at least have some truth to them. Rove being indicted today is not based in reality. The kooks on the left live in a world of conspiracies, Bush hatred, no ideas, hatred for America, specisl rights for gays, hated of capitalism the military and religion. Oh.. they want to be able to burn the American flag so they can express their right to free speech.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<So, what I want to know is: Why doesn't #8 get redlined?>> Why? Because it doesn't sound like something you agreee with? Typical. This section is not doing so well these days because a secion in World Events is being hit hard by the PC police and the many of the libs on here have cut and run.... after their dramatic exit speech.
