Thats true (about everyone being interested in human rights)…but ‘liberals’ certainly USED the AI report to score points. Which was kind of the point I was trying to make (well, the point I was making was about the use of hyperbole which, to me, was what both were).
-XT
Yeah, those wild eyed liberals at the FBI, must have made it all up, huh?
There was a time when Durbin would have been entirely correct, that no one reading that report would have believed that Americans were involved, Americans dont do things like that, must have been somebody else, somebody who isn’t like us. I wish he was lying. I wish the FBI was lying. He wasn’t, and they weren’t.
And why shouldn’t they? Gitmo was something that was clearly Bush’s responsibility, and if there are problems with it, why would they NOT be used to score points? That seems like basic political power games, 101. If the Democrats had been in charge, and had set up a Big Middle East Flower-And-Love Distribution Center, and there were a report from an impartial international observer about the corruption therein, the Republicans would use that to score points, and it wouldn’t be any more unfair than any other political point-scoring maneuver.
You might try reading what I said again. I said that the Democrats could have ‘won’ by taking the high ground and basically saying, “These charges are beneath contempt, not worth responding to. Next subject.”
Oh, spare me the righteous indignation. This is politics. Both sides do it. They jockey for position, try to trap each other, try to force the other guys to spend their political capitol, yada yada yada. I don’t seem to recall you being outraged at Durbin’s comments. Or do you think he really believed that it was reasonable to draw parallels between Gitmo and the Holocaust? In fact, I seem to recall a lot of Democrats on this very board taking the position that it was smart politics because it forced the issue out into the open. Do you hate such cynical manoevering?
You did misunderstand me. What I said was that it is a fringe group that was stridently anti-war. Among Democrats in government, I can think of only a handful. What Rove did was call this fringe ‘liberals’ and then get Democrats to associate with them. It was a tricky move, because that ‘fringe’ has disproportionate power in the Democratic party because of their grassroots organization and fund-raising. So Rove couldn’t lose. Either Democrats would have to disassociate them and piss them off, or get smeared by their actions.
Of course, if you’re going to get into bed with the likes of MoveOn and ANSWER, maybe you deserve it. If Republicans accepted huge money from the KKK and the Aryan Brotherhood and the Democrats could similarly trap them, more power to them. (For the record, I don’t think MoveOn is as bad as the KKK or other right-wing nutbar fringes, but ANSWER is worse).
You guys keep doing that, insisting that he said what you say he said, rather than what he did say. He said that if you read the FBI report and didn’t know it was about Americans, you wouldn’t have believed it.
He’s wrong. I would have believed it, because I am familiar with our long history of unsavory actions. I wish I could say that I wouldn’t have believed it, but I did. And, of course, the part you don’t like…it’s true. And whether I’m the coldest cynic on the planet or Rebecca of Donnybrook Farm…its true.
And it shouldn’t be. Period. Full stop.
Bush has killed half as many Americans as Osama now. He’s crippled thousands more, and every day he USES that to score points.
ANSWER, again, Sam? Brother, you got a serious fixation with them.
I don’t recall the FBI using words like ‘gulag’ or saying anything about Nazi concentration camps or Pol Pot. I must have missed that part.
Yes he does. Whats your point here Squink?
Well, I suppose they should. My point was, you should be unsurprised when Rove uses similar hyperbole to attack ‘liberals’ directly and Democrats indirectly. You guys keep trying to drag in a bunch of other stuff here. Rove used hyperbole to try and characaturize ‘liberals’ and paint Democrats with the same brush by association. AI and certain Democrats used hyperbole to attempt to paint Gitmo with a broad brush and associate it in the publics minds with death camps under the Nazis and the Soviets. Its the same thing. I’m sure most of you don’t see it in that light…but from where I’m sitting it looks like both of our political children trying to fling mud at the other, then whinning about getting hit themselves. Boohoo.
You are right…political power games, 101. Whats funny is the outrage here and the pass in the Gitmo threads. Geese and ganders and all that.
-XT
(a) it’s a bit unclear to me what time frame you’re talking about, but it seems like you’re saying that the liberals might have had a chance to gain the high ground months or years ago, but are totally screwed now
(b) I don’t think the history of politics shows that the way to beat negative attacks is by taking the high ground. Isn’t that more or less how liberals responded to the Swift Boats?
Actually, I wasn’t all that serious, there. I was mainly being flippant. I just wish that for once I was the one cackling with glee over the brilliant political maneuverings of my party, while the well-meaning but destined-to-be-losers on the other side were getting their panties in a bunch.
That said, there is politics-as-usual and there is politics-as-usual, and I think Rove’s most recent comments are totally inexcusably slanderously vilely wrong. So (a) I’d like to point that out to score political points and undermine him, and (b) I’d like to point that out and undermine him so that there will be a disincentive for future politicians of all stripes to descend that far into the gutter.
Agreed. I’ve never claimed democrats and/or liberals were saints. I do think that Rove’s comment is beyond the pale, however.
And in fact, I was not. I’ve now given a fairly meaty analysis of why not at least twice in this very thread, on this very page. Feel free to point out how wrong I am, if you think I’m wrong.
I believe that he believed that the point he was trying to make (these actions, which are the worst excesses at gitmo, taken in isolation, seem more like those of Evil People than of the US we love) was an accurate and relevant one. I think he was right.
I think his actions were wrong for two reasons:
(a) Politically, they were certain to backfire, as in fact they have
(b) As far as right and wrong go, I think that bringing up gitmo is a Good Thing. On the other hand, bringing up the Nazis still brings with it such a haze of Evil that it’s certainly bad politics, and is at least to a certain extent just plain wrong.
So, as I’ve said many times now, his comments are low on the outrage scale because they were so precise, lmiited, and basically accurate. But they would have been better, both politically and generally, without the mention of the nazis. Although they also might have just gotten lost in the shuffle, when his entire point was that these atrocities at gitmo were so serious that they should NOT get lost in the shuffle.
And here we are, once again discussing Durbin instead of Rove, you wily fox, you!
I asked you for a cite that anyone had used it against America. You posted an exerpt from Al Jazeera. Just because you posted it “without comment,” doesn’t free you from the obvious implication that you think it is an instance of someone using his words against America. Guess what? They are a news organization! They reported the story in pretty much the same way that Fox did.
Or is any Middle Eastern discussion of the matter automatically against America? Aren’t we bringing them peace and freedom?
Oh, they were trying to whip up hatred of our troops that they even included Bush’s position on the matter in their diatribe!
So, why are you flipping your lid now? Did you not post that as evidence of Durbin’s words being used against America? If not, why did you quote me?
Because I missed the key words ‘against’ America in the part I quoted from you. Thus my apology.
-XT
The idea that this is an ingenious ploy is wishful thinking. I have no doubt that it was an intentional effort on Rove’s part, but his days of being an “Architect” are well behind him. (Oddly, the Rove/Bush team’s magical PR mastery seems to have departed at about the same time JimmyJeff Gannon lost his permanent day pass.) It’s clearly a matter of desperation now.
They simply don’t have the numbers for it to be a clever manipulation. The proportion of people who think Bush has any idea what he is doing with our military is in the 30s and falling. The Democrats are well poised to engage in a debate on defense and the military, because they are not the ones who sent “the army that you have, not the one you want” into a shitstorm for no good reason. Reports continue to come out that our soldiers are being told that they should buy their own protective gear.
This is an intentional effort by Rove, but it is merely a swipe in desperation from a fat little shithead whose primary asset was a complete lack of ethics, morals, scruples or, in all likelihood, soul. Remember, it is being said that liberals are the ones who put our service people in danger by a person who was likely the one to out an undercover agent for the basest political purposes.
Finally, let me ask you this: Rove suggests that Democrats and Republicans watched the events of September 11th and wanted very different things. I wouldn’t have believed it, but perhaps it is true. So I ask you Republicans to confirm it:
I wanted Osama bin Laden dead. What did you want?
That won’t do. I want your resignation! 
Formally given. I feel like a total ass Hentor. Sorry.
-XT
You know I was just joking, right? I should have just said that I accept your apology without reservation. Don’t think twice about it.
I like discussing these things with you, because something actually happens, rather than when I exchange information with those on the far right. I never did thank you by the way, for your debunking my belief in the bit about abortions increasing under Bush. So, it works both ways.
A quick note on the “Architect” and whether this is a clever ploy: If you’re a Republican, and you have Rick Santorum distancing himself from you, something is amiss.
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives/2005/06/index.html#006895
Clearly, I am not an objective observer, nor have I ever claimed to be. But I think that Rove’s comment was vastly more offensive, heinous, and inexcusable than Durbin’s, for various reasons I have outlined in at least three different places in this page of this thread alone. But it seems that what you’re saying is not that you disagree with me, but that it doesn’t matter. That is, you seem to be saying “well, as long as there’s one offensive statement from the left, and one from the right, then you partisan idiots will spend all your effort attacking the opponent’s statement, all while being blind to the partisan statement from your own guy. Ahh, you partison idiots. How I mock thee.”
I have an honest and reasoned opinion about the level of outrageousness of Rove’s vs. Durbin’s comments. I might be wrong in that opinion, and I’m certainly at least somewhat influenced in that opinion by my political leanings, but you seem to be saying that no such difference in level of outrageousness could ever matter.
Basically, any time any politician of any stripe says something outrageous and hurtful, even if it’s orders of magnitudes worse than anything outrageous and hurtful any other politician has ever said, then by your argument no one should object, because, hey, people on the other side have also said outrageous and hurtful things, and hey, you’re just trying to score cheap political points, anyhow.
(This reminds me of the arguments over Anne Coulter and her book whose very first page says that all liberals are traitors. Because, hey, Al Franken has also written politically slanted books, so they must just cancel each other out, right?)
My God. I agree with what Rick Santorum said, and respect his courage and honesty in saying it.
Is there some 12-step program I should be entering?
Santorum said that! Santorum?! Oh, my. Oh, dear.
Can’t type. Giggling fits.