• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Traitor Accosts Karl Rove at Book Signing

ADK_Forever said:
How about treason and conspiracy to out a covert CIA agent?

This coward deserves to be behind bars with Cheeney, Bush, Libby, Rummy and Rice to name a few. One little woman scared him so much he left his book signing event, where he's hoping to make gazillions of dollars by re-writing history, without even signing a single book. Not very smart if you're trying to sell books. They should have let her have at him. He deserves a serious ass whuppin.
Click to expand...

At best you would never get a conviction. Sorry, not going to happen, not worth trying, not a good idea, not good for the country.
 
bicycleman said:
So when the left does it, its protected dissent, but when the chief executive officers do it, they are summoned to have their pee pees slapped by the Wax Man. Yeah, I see the "equality" here. Dont' you?
Click to expand...

So you think being invited to speak at a public hearing, with cameras and reporters, and tell Congress what you think is being slapped down? Really? Do you even understand democracy?
 
bicycleman said:
So you don't think it equally horrendous that Obama exposed top secret documents to the enemy? By his actions, he jeopardized American soldiers' lives, but I suppose you don't care about the lives of our fighting men.

Don't you think it was equally horrendous that Sandy Berger removed classified documents and walked out with them stuffed in his pants pocket?

Since when was Valerie Plame a covert operative? She was nothing but a CIA analyst, a position that even her neighbors knew she held.
Click to expand...

Please tell me you're better than asserting talking points.
 
Redress said:
At best you would never get a conviction. Sorry, not going to happen, not worth trying, not a good idea, not good for the country.
Click to expand...

I agree it won't ever happen.

I disagree that it would not be good for the country.
 
Redress said:
You are really trying too hard. It's kinda been the story of this whole thread, too much instead of enough. First off, no one is accusing them of being "traitors" or "terrorist sympathizers". There is no evidence they are even going to be charged with any crime. They are being asked to support claims they made. This is a pretty large difference. The two situations have exactly nothing in common.
Click to expand...


You need to go back and re-read what you posted. I bolded it for you, but I guess in your haste to shoot me down, you forgot what you wrote. Here, I will repeat it for you. You said that dissent was allowed in this country. You did not mention Jodie Evans' being a traitor. You only mentioned her right to dissent. I responded with the CEOs' right to dissent concerning the health care bill. Now, do you understand?
 
bicycleman said:
You need to go back and re-read what you posted. I bolded it for you, but I guess in your haste to shoot me down, you forgot what you wrote. Here, I will repeat it for you. You said that dissent was allowed in this country. You did not mention Jodie Evans' being a traitor. You only mentioned her right to dissent. I responded with the CEOs' right to dissent concerning the health care bill. Now, do you understand?
Click to expand...

No one is stopping them from dissent or calling them traitors or terrorists. See, no comparison. I know this is complex stuff, but do try and keep up.
 
aps said:
Please tell me you're better than asserting talking points.
Click to expand...

Do you have anything to add to this thread? It's your move now. Please refute my asserted talking points.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
No one is stopping them from dissent or calling them traitors or terrorists. See, no comparison. I know this is complex stuff, but do try and keep up.
Click to expand...

Henry Waxman does not like them dissenting against the health care bill. Did you miss that one?
 
let's take a look
especially at the 2:30 mark; listen to rove assert that the downing street memo is illegitimate
that seems to beg another question. how valid is the downing street information and if it is found accurate, then that would appear to discredit rove
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gubK3GHkH14"]YouTube- Karl Rove Heckled, Called "War Criminal" At Book Signing. Woman brings handcuffs[/nomedia]

The Downing Street Memos :: FCO Legal Advice text

the veracity of the downing street memo is one which has not been officially challenged

but i do notice that rove, the *****, ran from the book signing like the chickenhawk traitor he has been found to be

i only hope his remaining book signings also go so "well"
 
bicycleman said:
Since when was Valerie Plame a covert operative? She was nothing but a CIA analyst, a position that even her neighbors knew she held.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance on this issue is astounding.

She was covert as described by law.
The CIA director wrote a letter to the judge that she was covert.

Her outing by BushCo put other Americans' lives at risk. It put other countries' intelligent agents in danger. It's amazing that even the most partisan rightee can ignore those ramifications in order to defend Bush's lies to send Americans to an illegal war to die. Holy ****! :doh
 
bicycleman said:
Henry Waxman does not like them dissenting against the health care bill. Did you miss that one?
Click to expand...

Really? He may be questioning their facts. Wow, a benign explanation, I wonder why you did not think of it...
 
bicycleman said:
Where is he factually wrong? Please provide proof.
Click to expand...

How do you expect me to prove how I see things? Really, how about one post where you are not over the top?
 
bicycleman said:
Do you have anything to add to this thread? It's your move now. Please refute my asserted talking points.
Click to expand...

From Patrick Fitzgerald's press conference:

Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community.

Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.

FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security.

Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.

Transcript of Special Counsel Fitzgerald's Press Conference - washingtonpost.com
Click to expand...

If you can counter my post with someone who has as much personal knowledge about this as Patrick Fitzgerald, I'd be happy to read it.
 
aps said:
From Patrick Fitzgerald's press conference:



If you can counter my post with someone who has as much personal knowledge about this as Patrick Fitzgerald, I'd be happy to read it.
Click to expand...

expect him to run and hide from that challenge like rove at a book signing
 
bicycleman said:
Henry Waxman does not like them dissenting against the health care bill. Did you miss that one?
Click to expand...

Oh my god! He "doesn't like" it. Clearly he's going to line them up and shoot them. He's not going to ask them for their opinion in a hearing and focus all kinds of media attention on their complaints. :roll:

When being invited to air your complaints at a public hearing is "oppression" you know people are going absolutely insane.
 
Okay, the woman is an idiot. This is a pathetic political publicity stunt and nothing more.

If you actually gave a damn about the story and wanted to talk about that you'd have left the over the top, opinion based rhetoric out of it. If you wanted to have an honest conversation about the fact you view the woman as a traitor or terrorist supporter you wouldn't have had to hide it under the guise of a thread talking about her attempt to arrest Karl Rove.

That said, Redress is right, the over the top rhetoric and recasting situations into the light you want doesn't help your case, it weakens it. Before the typical peanut gallery joins in going "OMG, that damn faux conservative Zyphlin, always taking the side of liberals", this is the exact same argument I made recently in Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh threads, so get over yourself before you even try it.

Also, its ridiculous to assume she'd be "in irons" by now if Bush was still in office. If she wasn't there previously there'd be no reason to think she would be now.
 
Redress said:
I am not quite sure what you would charge either Rove or Cheney with, though I do find the image amusing.
Click to expand...

The trick is to accuse them of one thing, valid or not, and when they lie about it, nail them for lying. Kinda like we did Clinton. :mrgreen:
 
Zyphlin said:
That said, Redress is right, the over the top rhetoric and recasting situations into the light you want doesn't help your case, it weakens it. Before the typical peanut gallery joins in going "OMG, that damn faux conservative Zyphlin, always taking the side of liberals", this is the exact same argument I made recently in Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh threads, so get over yourself before you even try it.
Click to expand...

It's sad that people think that "taking the side of liberals" makes you not conservative, as if everything is about ideology.
 
Captain America said:
The trick is to accuse them of one thing, valid or not, and when they lie about it, nail them for lying. Kinda like we did Clinton. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Quality work there. I found that hilarious.
 
misterman said:
Oh my god! He "doesn't like" it. Clearly he's going to line them up and shoot them. He's not going to ask them for their opinion in a hearing and focus all kinds of media attention on their complaints. :roll:

When being invited to air your complaints at a public hearing is "oppression" you know people are going absolutely insane.
Click to expand...

The letter to the John Deere executive:

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20100326/Allen.Letter.pdf


The letter states that Congress is requesting each one's presence. What if the CEOs ignore this request? Can they ignore it, or is this really a veiled attempt at coercion? Last time I looked, the First Amendment allowed freedom of speech and dissent.

Now, the First Amendment does not allow assault, something that Jodie Evans is guilty of. She put her hands on Karl Rove, and assaulted him in her attempt to handcuff him. Her actions remove freedom of speech from the equation. Get your facts straight.
 
Zyphlin said:
Okay, the woman is an idiot. This is a pathetic political publicity stunt and nothing more.

If you actually gave a damn about the story and wanted to talk about that you'd have left the over the top, opinion based rhetoric out of it. If you wanted to have an honest conversation about the fact you view the woman as a traitor or terrorist supporter you wouldn't have had to hide it under the guise of a thread talking about her attempt to arrest Karl Rove.

That said, Redress is right, the over the top rhetoric and recasting situations into the light you want doesn't help your case, it weakens it. Before the typical peanut gallery joins in going "OMG, that damn faux conservative Zyphlin, always taking the side of liberals", this is the exact same argument I made recently in Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh threads, so get over yourself before you even try it.

Also, its ridiculous to assume she'd be "in irons" by now if Bush was still in office. If she wasn't there previously there'd be no reason to think she would be now.
Click to expand...

The floor is open. Let's hear what you have to say about the topic. Personal insults are allowed, but do they contribute to the debate?
 
Last edited:
misterman said:
It's sad that people think that "taking the side of liberals" makes you not conservative, as if everything is about ideology.
Click to expand...

That would depend on whether one is here to baffle us with his BS, or here for honest debate.
 
bicycleman said:
That would depend on whether one is here to baffle us with his BS, or here for honest debate.
Click to expand...

You start a thread with slanted, biased, propaganda verbage and expect honest debate? :confused:

I think you're more hoping for a flame-war. Just my two cents. :roll:
 
bicycleman said:
The floor is open. Let's hear what you have to say about the topic. Personal insults are allowed, but do they contribute to the debate?
Click to expand...

First, there are no personal insults.

Second, I was addressing the topic. YOUR use of idiotic over the top rhetoric was in the topic, and the subject. Your accusations of her being a terrorist supporter or a traitor is as much the topic as her actions against Rove, because you CHOSE to use those words rather than focus on the story. Which was entirely my point.

The womans an idiot, and the action she took was attrocious. Its sad there are people who have to use over the top rhetoric and inflame things all the time when talking about situations like this because it takes away from what the woman did. Why? Because the story has been cached in such a way that if you just focus on condemning her then you look like you're condonining the looniness of the opinions someone is holding as if they're fact.

If you had posted the story and said that this stupid, a publicity stunt, she should be ashamed of herself, and even added an aside like you weren't surprised of it coming from her, you'd haev a number of liberals that would've been on this thread saying "Yeah, that was rather dumb" and leaving it at that.

But instead you have to throw traitor in the subject, you throw terrorist supporter around, and suddenly they can't agree with you without pointing out the parts they DON'T agree with. Its no ones fault but your own, and your own dishonest attempt to either falsely present one topic while baiting people into an other or ignorantly letting your rhetoric overtake your desire for an actual conversation...which one it is, I'm unsure.

Opinion is not fact. If you insert opinion into something that is talking about a factual event don't expect people to simply comment on the event and not your opinion. If you just want to talk about the event and your opinion on that alone then there was no reason for the "traitor" and "terrorist sympathizer" rhetoric.

Your own attempt to do what she was doing, sensatioanlizing and acting like a drama queen in presentation, has actually caused less people to agree with your views of her on THIS situation because they're too busy dealing with the fallacies they view of your opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom