The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away…
Well doesn’t that mean you’re supposed to be offended by everything? 
So you think that if I hadn’t put it in the OP we wouldn’t have Martin and the others checking in here and saying, “BFD, he’ll still be giving Bush advice.”? 'Cause I don’t see it. We’d get the same shit from them without any other discussions going on. It’d just be a single topic tossed back and forth between folks. This way we’ve got more than one. As for my “defense” of it, well, I could blame it on my not having slept for 24+ hours when I wrote the OP, that I’ve had to trim back on my meds due to not having insurance at the moment, so I’m certainly doing things that I wouldn’t normally do and that I’ve been spending way too much time on the boards, however, while all true, none of those things would magically make what I posted disappear. Nor would they erase the memory of what I posted. Nor am I, like Allen, attempting to claim that I had no idea of what the word meant.
In order to do that, I’d have to first deny that I posted it, then I’d have to claim I didn’t know what it meant, then that I was quoted out of context, and finally, that I had access to classified information which I couldn’t release to anyone. Frankly, however, I fail to see how anything a random asshole such as myself could say or do could possibly compare to the actions of people that have led directly to the deaths of 3K+ Americans, 600K+ Iraqis, and the flushing of close to half a trillion dollars down the largest toilet this world’s ever seen. That is offensive and outrageous. The comments of some random asshole in a medium dedicated to slandering people anonomously and exchanging porn has got to pale by comparison, don’t you think?
CarnalK, I don’t expect, nor care, if anyone defends what I posted in this thread. Unlike you, I’m not afraid to take the heat. And IMHO, the best thing that we can do is to take offensive terms and make them so mundane and trivial that no one notices them any more. In fact, I think we should do it with almost all evil, heinious things in the world. Why? Well, we’ve tried attaching a great deal of importance to making sure that everyone knows Hitler was one of the vilest humans to walk the Earth, hasn’t eliminated neo-Nazis, genocide, or any other thing which you’d think that we all have sworn off of. Now imagine if the common perception of Hitler was that of him a presented in the horrible film Little Nicky: A guy in a French maid outfit with a pineapple up his ass. Think that anyone would have thought that Iraq was a serious threat to the US when Bush compared Saddam to Hitler if that was the case? How many people would want to emulate a guy with a pineapple up his ass? I doubt if very many people would. That’s one of the reasons why most of the Nazis on Hogan’s Heroes were played by Jews who’d suffered persecution under the Nazis. They knew that by protraying the Nazis as a bunch of incompetant idiots, they’d be stripping them of some of their power to frighten people.
But let’s not pretend that there’s a single thing I could post which would please you. Even my not posting would piss you off, since you wouldn’t have me to bitch about. So go ahead, pat yourself on the back, and call yourself superior to me here, and anywhere else you want. I don’t care.
Cervaise, do you really think that Martin’s capable of being honest enough with himself to even think that Rove, et. al might not be the greatest thing to happen to this country? I’d be willing to bet that if incontrovertable evidence came out that Bush & Co. had gotten us into the war in Iraq simply to enrich themselves, at least one Doper here would be saying, “History will justify their actions! Just you wait and see!” Hell, they’d say the same thing if Bushco performed an abortion on national TV.
Oh yeah, but just like God* told… Abraham?, Moses?.. er, one of those guys, to sacrifice his own son to prove his faith, God* told George to sacrifice his country to prove his.
*God, or a psychotic inner voice – probably the latter.
So it is your assertion that anytime someone leaves the employ of the White House it is a sign that said person has:
- Fallen out of favor
- Decided to “bail out” of a sinking ship
- Been forced out by negative public opinion
You don’t believe people who work for the President can leave for simple reasons such as, “I signed on to work on specific policy, those policies have either been completed (successfully or unsuccessfully), and thus it is time to move on?” The people who end up working with the Executive Office of the President (or the Cabinet) are very motivated, career-oriented people who have held many important positions in their lives prior to working for the White House and usually these people go on to hold may important positions after working for the White House. It’s not at all uncommon for senior policy types at all levels of government to have a job in which they plan to stay for a certain period of time and then move on, in the process picking up a very nice addition to their already impressive resumes.
Who knows? Probably the biggest reason is, the Attorney General is a Senate confirmed, important public position within the Government. Getting ridd of AG Gonzales means another confirmation battle. Plus, it looks really, really bad when you have to get rid of someone who is in the cabinet because of their actions. With people who work for the Executive Office of the President, these are more like traditional “worker bees” in a corporate structure, who can and are removed on a whim (or who will themselves come and go on a whim.) Most of them are usually barely even known by the public at large. Rove is remarkable in how well known he has become, considering his actual posts within the government. Despite this, I’d bet most Americans, even the ones who would recognize Rove by name probably wouldn’t correctly identify him as Deputy Chief of Staff. Nor could they probably even explain the responsibilities of either the Deputy Chief of Staff or the Chief of Staff.
Furthermore, it was just one possibility, that Rove was asked to resign because the President viewed him as being toxic. It’s also entirely plausible Rove just doesn’t want to stay on for the full term in a lame duck Presidency (which the Bush presidency has been argued to be and will certainly be at some point in 2008.) This in and of itself isn’t entirely uncommon in Presidential administrations.
As for the “playing poker” bit. Andrew Jackson employed an entirely non-official “kitchen cabinet” who wielded exceptional power. Called such because they met with Jackson in the kitchen (at least allegedly.) With modern technology and video conferencing a similar unofficial group of advisers could easily be used by a modern President.
Take this to the bank: no power junky gives up power without a compelling reason, and spending time with his family just ain’t it. If he were seriously ill and wanted to spend his time reading the Scriptures and looking for a loophole, they would have said so, they would have milked it for every drop of sympathy they could muster.
There’s something coming down the road, and they know it. They want to get Rove out before it arrives so that they can say he didn’t quit because of it, he already quit. Its pre-emptive damage control.
What is it? Don’t know, but we’ll know pretty soon. If it could have been covered up, they would have done so, it can’t, so Rove is toast. They know its coming, they know they can’t stop it, so Rove is outa there.
I’m thinking George didn’t read all the way to the end of the story, where the boy doesn’t actually get sacrificed.
I’m afraid to take the heat? You really should just drop the “cowardice” meme as it really highlights your “internet blowhard” streak.
And again you are completely bullshitting. You weren’t trying some Lenny Bruce style anti-censorship crap. You admitted trying to smear Rove with the term and that only makes sense if you were implying that he was somehow connected to the “macaca incident”. Or maybe that ALL republicans must wear that shame.
Seriously: get over yourself.
He bought a used bible at the campus bookstore, and only read the highlighted parts.
God said “Abraham, kill me a son.”
Abe said “God, you must be puttin’ me on”
God said “No” and Abe said “What?”
God said “You can do what you want to, son
but…”
“Next time you see me comin’, man, you better run!”
All praise Johnny Winter 
St. Robert of Hibbing
That’s rich coming from a guy who has a homepage dedicated to snarking at people.
Pttht. Why should I trot out something so totally unconnected to Rove if I was being serious? There’s ample accusations out there for me to draw on. You know, like one’s that he was the mastermind behind the firings of the various attorneys because they “wouldn’t play ball,” that he’s the guy who rigged elections to enable Bush and his cronies to come to power, that he’s the brains of the administration, and the list just goes on and on.
I was “over myself” a long time ago. I just find it hysterical that you seem to have nothing better to do with your life than make the ramblings of some twit your focus. After all, didn’t you admit that based on my postings here my life seems to be waaay more interesting than yours? (To refresh your memory, the topic came up when I suggested that you put me on your “ignore list.”) I’ll also note that this if the first time you’ve reared your head attacking me in a political thread. Kind of funny that someone who appears to be backing the current administration would only do it in a thread wherein the OP is the subject of a pile-on. One would think that if you had any balls, you’d have done this in other threads.
Jesus, can we please call a cease-fire on this argument tactic? It’s really just a variation on “But-Clinton” strawman.
- Pin someone as a member of a certain party
- Generalize what you think someone in that party did, or will in the fugure, say, do, think, believe, opine, espouse
- Disprove it by whatever means you choose (bonus for using logical fallacy)
- Like magic, your opponent is now stupid for doing something that you imagine was done (or will be done) by some other imaginary person.
Moratorium on both sides, please, for God’s sakes. Name-calling and pie-throwing are preferable to this.
Tucker, honey, your issues w/CarnalK etc aside, there’s been quite a number of reasonable type folk (assuming I’m reasonable, for example), who also think that the macaca thing was ill advised. you (and others) are ending up derailing a lovely pitting of Rove because of it.
The Nation’s David Corn argues Rove should not be allowed to “cut and run” from the messes he’s made.
I don’t care what Martin Fuckface Hyde believes, or doesn’t believe, or thinks, or doesn’t think, or even if the fuckface is capable of thinking, the which is an open question for anyone who’s paying attention. All I care about is that nobody give the fuckface anything resembling legitimate ammunition to distract the casual reader away from the real subject of this thread, which is to say, the walking talking cancerous ass-tumor that is Karl Rove. And your bizarre leap to a wholly out-of-place epithet is, indeed, ammunition, onto which Martin Fuckface Hyde happily leaped. Do yourself a favor, and more importantly do the theme of your thread a favor, and soak the powder a bit, wouldja? Crimony.
WHAT? So, we keep people on to save face? Is this anyway to run a country? Hell, is this the way any business is run? Jeebus, IF this is typical GOP thinking, this is messed up. So what if it looks really, really BAD to rid yourself of a nasty piece of work in your staff? A leader does what needs to be done to ensure the integrity of his staff-the better to engender trust from his constituents and people (i.e. US). I seem to recall Bush saying that he would deal harshly with those who were found to have behaved improperly. True, he was referring to Plamegate, but principles are principles–oh, wait. Not for these clowns-the most unprincipled wastes of space I’ve encountered since Nixon et al. And before you take me to task for not citing an impropriety of Rove’s–I refer you to the link in BrainGlutton’s post (the Corn article).
How is this relevant? Who cares if Joe American can’t identify him? Do we not judge a man’s character by his words and actions? Does he have to be well known (or potentially toxic) to be removed? He held one of the most influential positions in the country. Frankly, now I’m concerned about those worker bees you mentioned–what the hell are they up to? Rove drove policy decisions, one way or another-no matter his celebrity status or Joe American’s ignorance over his job title.
Bush willingly part with his Architect? His turdblossom? I highly doubt it. My thought is that Rove went to him and said, I’m outta here, boyo-sucks to be you…and Bush had no choice but to accept it.
Jeebus-there is nothing wrong with a President having advisors–I sincerely hope that all have had such. The problem comes when the scope of advisors is narrow and doesn’t include opposing/alternate points of view.
Why am I bothering? It’s like trying to talk to a deaf man in a wind tunnel…
You really are clueless. I wasn’t “backing the current administration” in any way, shape or form. I used a big Bush lie as an example to point out you own hypocrisy, ffs. You are clearly one of those partisan idiots who thinks anyone who doesn’t laugh at their idiotic Bush jokes is some nutjob Republican. And while I hate to break up the hilarity, what could possibly make you think you are “my focus”? I just posted to a message board, like you do - only about 10 times less often.
And wring, this maybe could have been a “lovely pitting of Rove” (I guess a hard winter’s a comin’) it would be no thanks to Tuckerfan. I mean, come on, how much effort did he put into that OP? He was clearly desperate to be the first one with the scoop on the Dope. “Woot”, quote from link, and “macaca”. Is it really a surprise people seized on it when it’s the only original part of his OP?
Steel cage death match. Only possible resolution.
I’d pay $14.95 to see that.
Well, I’m pretty much done. Tuckerfan just wants to call me a cowardly meanie and darkly hint at my evil machinations from nonnyworld. I guess the million dollar question is “Why should I trot out something so totally unconnected to Rove if I was being serious?” My guess was to imply that Rove was racist, which quite trumps firing lawyers on the bad optics scale, outside of Klan rallies and Bar Association meetings.