Dems Say Rove Should Apologize or Resign

This is the height of hypocrcy

Quote:

---

Dems Say Rove Should Apologize or Resign


Thursday June 23, 2005 8:46 PM

AP Photo WX113

By JIM ABRAMS

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats demanded Thursday that White House adviser Karl Rove either apologize or resign for accusing liberals of wanting ``therapy and understanding'' for the Sept. 11 attackers, escalating the rancor that threatens to consume Washington.

Rove's comments - and the response from the political opposition - mirrored earlier flaps over Democratic chairman Howard Dean's criticism of Republicans, a House Republican's statement that Democrats demonize Christians and Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin's comparison of the Guantanamo prison to Nazi camps and Soviet gulags.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan came to Rove's defense, saying the president's chief political adviser was ``simply pointing out the different philosophies and different approaches when it comes to winning the war on terrorism.''

``Of course not,'' McClellan said when asked by reporters whether President Bush will ask Rove to apologize.

Rove, in a speech Wednesday evening to the New York state Conservative Party just a few miles north of Ground Zero, said, ``Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.'' Conservatives, he said, ``saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war.''

He added that the Democratic Party made the mistake of calling for ``moderation and restraint'' after the terrorist attacks.

During the 2004 campaign, Bush dismissed the notion of negotiating with terrorists and said, ``You can't sit back and hope that somehow therapy will work and they will change their ways.''

Rove's comments quickly escalated the bitter divide between the parties that could get worse as Congress prepares for what may be a drawn-out political fight, possibly this summer, over a Supreme Court nominee.

New York Sen. Charles Schumer said Rover ``took something that is virtually sacred to New Yorkers'' - the tragedy of the Sept. 11 attacks - ``and politicized it for political, opportunistic purposes.''

``Karl Rove is not just another political operative,'' added New York's other Democratic senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton. ``He sits in the White House, a few doors down from the president.''

At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Thursday, Clinton urged Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to repudiate the ``insulting comment.''

Rumsfeld replied that it ``is unfortunate when things become so polarized or so politicized.''

Schumer and Clinton joined the four Democratic senators from Connecticut and New Jersey in a letter to Rove requesting that he immediately retract his comments. ``To try to score partisan, political points at the expense of the 3,000 victims and their families was unacceptable and opportunistic,'' they wrote.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., wrote a similar letter to Rove from House Democrats.

Schumer said Rove's comments might have been made in the heat of the moment and he was willing to accept an apology. But ``if they try to stonewall,'' he said, ``then I think resignation would be called for.''

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also said Rove, the political mastermind behind Bush's election victories, should fully apologize for his remarks or resign. Dean said Bush should ``condemn Karl Rove's desperate and divisive attempt to help the Republicans regain their political footing.''

Republicans, meanwhile, have recently condemned House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for calling the Iraq War a ``grotesque mistake,'' and demanded and finally got an apology from Durbin for his linking detainee abuse and Nazis.

And they were unapologetic about Rove's comments.

``The Republican leadership priority is to have our troops hunt down, kill or capture terrorists before they try to attack us again at home,'' said Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

``The Democratic leadership priority is to actively engage in the politics of division and distraction that can undermine our national security in favor of a left-wing agenda,'' he said.

Increasing public doubts about the Iraq war have emboldened Democrats to challenge the president's policies. Republicans, in turn, contend that criticism undermines the war on terror.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a Republican running for re-election in an overwhelmingly Democratic city, issued a statement urging both sides to keep politics out of the war on terrorism. ``We owe it to those we lost to keep partisan politics out of the discussion and keep alive the united spirit that came out of 9/11,'' he said.

---

After all the things Durbin and Dean just to name a few have been saying about republicans they have the nerve to say this because Rove called a lib a lib. Good for him.

when I first read that the Dems were calling on someone to resign over comments I thought they had come to their senses and called out Durbin or Dean. Then I read that it was Rove. Oh dear, they really are tw*ts.

I seem to remember the war in afghanistan enjoying rather major bipartisian support.

Heh, I would apoligize if I were Rove, I'd say
"I'm sorry that I said the whiney, no-good, traitorous members of society wanted Thereapy and understanding for the September 11th Hijackers, we all know that they want forgivness and love for them. I'm sorry for misunderstanding the treasonous part of the American Public. Thank you"
Then I'd take refuge in a bunker somewhere in the Idaho potato fields.

I think Rove was off base on this one. As Phatose said, there was some whining in the far Left circles, but the phrase liberal has come to mean anyone left of center and a LOT of them were behind the President immediately after 9/11 and into Afghanistan. Things didn't start becoming tears and handwringing until we decided to make Hussein pay for his crimes.

That being said, I think this is a silly, silly thing for the Democrats to get fired up about, and I don't think they really are. This is an effort solely to capture the ear of the uninformed middle in America. For weeks, Dean and Durbin have been going off the hook as they've tried to throw red meat to their extremes, and they've taken a PR hit for it in the middle. They're using this as a 'well, the Republicans do it too' moment, and you can't blame them for that. Rove should have known better... our right wing doesn't need any firing up so this could have only hurt, not much chance for help.

Wow. Way to replace Dean as Biggest Ass in US Politics right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Wow. Way to replace Dean as Biggest Ass in US Politics right now.

---

I'm astounded by your brilliance Proletariat. I couldn't have said it better myself, but I certainly tried. It's amazing how great minds think alike. ~:)

With your explanation and my profanity, it's a nice one-two punch.

:happyg:

Quote:

---

I think Rove was off base on this one. As Phatose said, there was some whining in the far Left circles, but the phrase liberal has come to mean anyone left of center and a LOT of them were behind the President immediately after 9/11 and into Afghanistan. Things didn't start becoming tears and handwringing until we decided to make Hussein pay for his crimes.

---

THe big difference is Rove is telling the truth. How many liberals on these very boards said exactly what he did? He didnt accuse the democrats of anything.Is Jag a democrat or even an american. No. But he certainly is a liberal and he certainly agres with whatRove said as do many others. Its far different from saying he hates all democrats or that they never did an honest days work in their life. He was merely pointing out the difference in the way many conservatives viewed this matter vs how many liberals did. To say "Wow. Way to replace Dean as Biggest Ass in US Politics right now" is way off base. Sorry you two but thats the fact. Again its to bad some people cant handle the truth.Screw this PC crap.

At least someone has the balls to stand up and call out the fifth column here in America for what it is.

These people fight tooth and nail for the detainees at Gitmo, and then go out in front of God and the world and declare Iraq is a lost cause. What does that do to the moral of the troops?

Gawain,
You're arguing about the difference between what you're able to say and what you should say. I agree with you that I find it interesting that the Democrats chose to take offense. All Rove has to say is "I didn't think I was including you in my comments. Apparently, you did". But let's face facts, we on the right have used the label 'liberal' to mean anything from Joe Lieberman (or Tom Ridge for that matter) to Noam Chomsky. Because we've been so aribitrary in handing the insult out, it's small wonder there was some confusion in terms of who he actually meant.

And no, what he said doesn't raise to the level of what Dean said or what Durbin said "When I look at America's military, I have a hard time distinguishing from Nazi Germany or Soviet Gulags. I can only imagine what other countries think".

But let's not kid ourselves. It's a rigged game. The media is going to (in fact, already has) jump on this to give Durbin & Dean their way out of the hole they jumped in, and Rove, being the shrewd political wizard he is, should have seen that. I don't dispute what he said, I dispute why he chose now to say it. I would have thought that of all people, he would have been trying to put a gag rule on the right, so nobody says anything the media can use to compare to Dean & Durbin.

Panzer,

I agree with you whole heartedly that there is a 5th column in this country that is actively & knowingly working in the interest of our enemies. Katie Couric is their #1 cheerleader, but it goes well beyond her. But when you're going to say things like what Rove said, you need to be quite clear who is the target of your criticism. Due to overuse, the label 'liberal' means anyone to the left of Karl Rove, which includes a LOT of people, including guys like Tucker Carlson, Tommy Thompson, Arnold Schwarzenegger and myself, and many other people that are most certainly not opposed to the war in Iraq. I mean, we here on the board talk about what a liberal Arnold is. I don't think that's true, but I've given up arguing with you guys on this. Does that mean Arnold should be branded as having wanted to give therapy to Al Queda on September 12th?

Er...nice post? I can't even argue that.
Post count +1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

He was merely pointing out the difference in the way many conservatives viewed this matter vs how many liberals did. To say "Wow. Way to replace Dean as Biggest Ass in US Politics right now" is way off base. Sorry you two but thats the fact. Again its to bad some people cant handle the truth.Screw this PC crap.

---

Perhaps Karl missed this:

Quote:

---

Three days after the terrorist attacks, the Senate voted 98-0 and the House voted 420-1 for a resolution authorizing Bush to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for the terrorism. After the votes, Bush said in a statement: "I am gratified that the Congress has united so powerfully by taking this action. It sends a clear message — our people are together, and we will prevail."

---

Let's try and not use a double standard when politicians we agree with say moronic things.

Quote:

---

Three days after the terrorist attacks, the Senate voted 98-0 and the House voted 420-1 for a resolution authorizing Bush to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for the terrorism. After the votes, Bush said in a statement: "I am gratified that the Congress has united so powerfully by taking this action. It sends a clear message — our people are together, and we will prevail."

---

And perhaps youve missed the fact that theve been backing away from it ever since .

Would you like to find some quotes from "liberals " who said just what Rove accuses them of saying almost right after 911. They choose to take offense because it hits to close to home and what their really thinking. I should take offense as a conservative because he basicly called us all war mongers. Ypu can read what you like into it. Basicly conservatives believe we should defeat the enemy whatever it takes while liberals think we should appease them and ask "why cant we all just get along?" I mean if someone attacks you their must be a reason. you must have done something to them first right? That is unless your Israel . Then you attack people just because their Palestinians or if your the US then you attack them to take their oil. But at least even liberals here in the US have the sense to back Israel.

I didn't miss anything of the sort. I'm saying that even though the sentiment is true, it's an imbecilic way of putting it. Why give them fodder?


Edit: Oh, and if you think what he said isn't true (lefties on the board, I'm looking at you), read this and weep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Let's try and not use a double standard when politicians we agree with say moronic things.

---

Very nice to hear, intellectual honesty. ~:)

The really unfortunate thing is that too many conservatives have the whole conservative/not conservative thing defined as good/evil. Taking it to extremes quite a few seem to believe that you can't be a "real christian" if you are not a conservative. And by their definition, not being a conservative = liberal = communist = terrorist. It is crap. It is divisive. Above all it is stupid. It is some sort of very scary religious crusade.

political soap opera drama at it's finest, or is it at it's worse?

seriously there are much much better things for the congress to be doing other than demanding apolgies for slights and offensive statements...

christ the congress is about as crap as the reality tv shows that come on after the crap nightly news... ~;)

Moderation and Restraint do not = Therapy and Understanding .
He misrepresented their words , so apologise . Then again he is involved in politics so misrepresentation is part of the job . ~;)

the Senate voted 98-0 and the House voted 420-1 for a resolution authorizing Bush to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for the terrorism.

And perhaps youve missed the fact that theve been backing away from it ever since .
And perhaps you missed the fact that they have been backing away from it ever since they started using force against those who were not responsible for the terrorism .

Looking from the outside in, Rove's comments do seem out of line. When making a comment as inflammatory as that, you better be sure that those you are targeting actually fall within the comment. Here he has said that what could be defined as 50% off the US population beleive that. This I find difficult to beleive.

I've nothing against calling a spade a spade, but don't then say multitudes of people are carrying that spade when they are not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dgb

Looking from the outside in, Rove's comments do seem out of line. When making a comment as inflammatory as that, you better be sure that those you are targeting actually fall within the comment. Here he has said that what could be defined as 50% off the US population beleive that. This I find difficult to beleive.

I've nothing against calling a spade a spade, but don't then say multitudes of people are carrying that spade when they are not.

---

Exactly. I will definitely call a spade a spade and expect the same from others. The idea that the 48% of us who voted the other way are a bunch of liberals, commies, and fairies makes my blood boil.

As it is, I don't see any point in demanding an apology (or resignation) out of a neanderthal like Rove. He actually believes that garbage, as does the current occupant of the Oval office. This shines unwanted light on the unfortunate personality trait of a president who sees every action he takes as "righteous" and never even considers any others' views. When those who oppose anything you want automatically are labelled as "evil" it makes rational thought quite challenging. This is reflected in his arrogance, and in the inability to admit making any mistakes. A righteous president could never make a mistake. (Hmmm...that would make him like royalty of old...hail the king, borne of the royal blood.)

Quote:

---

Here he has said that what could be defined as 50% off the US population beleive that. This I find difficult to beleive

---

Remember, he said liberals, not democrats. 50% of America is not liberal.. i wouldnt even go so far as to say 25%.

If he said democrats, he should take those comments back, but he spoke the exact truth about liberals - good for him.

Well, like I said PJ, we've blurred the line on what is a liberal as much as anybody. Like I said, I've heard Tom Ridge, Tommy Thomson and Pete Domenici described as liberals on different occassions. I don't think that's who Rove had in mind when he made that crack, but that's my point. He should have defined his target audience better.

The guy who's filling in for Rush today said Rove was doing a 'pied piper' trick with this. He was trying to lure Hillary, Joe Biden and others out of their 'moderate' costume. If that's the case, he burnt a lot of political capital for something most people already know.

Knowing Rove this probably is some elaborate trick that will rake in the votes in 06. ~;)

Im sure glad he's on our side, but of course no one that smart could be liberal. (Yea i meant it to be vague.)

Quote:

---

Edit: Oh, and if you think what he said isn't true (lefties on the board, I'm looking at you), read this and weep.

---

How about this

Quote:

---

Thursday, June 23, 2005 6:32 p.m. EDT

Clinton 9/11 Reaction Proves Rove Right

Democrats are livid over Karl Rove's complaint that liberals reacted to the 9/11 attacks by urging "understanding" for terrorists.

But that was exactly the advice offered by ex-President Clinton, delivered in an address to Georgetown University less than two months after the attacks.

Story Continues Below

"First of all, terror, the killing of noncombatants for economic, political, or religious reasons has a very long history - as long as organized combat itself," Clinton lectured. "Those of us who come from various European lineages are not blameless."

Then the ex-president catalogued the terrorist abuses perpetrated by Europeans and Americans on Jews, Muslims and people of color.

"Indeed, in the first Crusade, when the Christian soldiers took Jerusalem, they first burned a synagogue with 300 Jews in it, and proceeded to kill every woman and child who was Muslim on the Temple mound," he noted.

"Here in the United States, we were founded as a nation that practiced slavery and slaves were, quite frequently, killed even though they were innocent."

The U.S. "looked the other way," Clinton charged, "when significant numbers of Native Americans were dispossessed and killed to get their land or their mineral rights or because they were thought of as less than fully human and we are still paying the price today."

By the time Mr. Clinton was done with his terrorism history lesson, it was clear America got what it deserved on 9/11.

---

Now you may accuse Rove of painting with to broad a brush but thats about all.

Quote:

---

The idea that the 48% of us who voted the other way are a bunch of liberals,

---

Your now as guilty as Rove of painting with too broad a brush. To say that everyone who voted for Kery was a liberal or weven a democrat is wrong. By the way only 18% of Americans consider themselves liberal. So in that case it must be those like Red who want to be called moderates when in reality their just denying their liberals just because of stuff like this.Liberalism is dead in America. Praise the lord. ~D Rove never said those who voted for Kerry were libers in fact two sentences after his contriverial one he identified who he was speaking of and that was moveon.org.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Now you may accuse Rove of painting with to broad a brush but thats about all.

---

Yeah, that's about my thoughts. If he would've said 'some' or 'many' liberals there'd be no problem in my mind.
Even still, I'd ask if this means now that all of the outraged congressional democrats are now coming out of the closet and admitting to being liberals? They've always seemed to do everything possible before to keep out from under that label.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Exactly. I will definitely call a spade a spade and expect the same from others. The idea that the 48% of us who voted the other way are a bunch of liberals, commies, and fairies makes my blood boil.

---

After saying this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Taking it to extremes quite a few seem to believe that you can't be a "real christian" if you are not a conservative. And by their definition, not being a conservative = liberal = communist = terrorist. It is crap. It is divisive. Above all it is stupid. It is some sort of very scary religious crusade.

---

Sure, you added the 'taking it to extremes' bit, but the two thoughts don't seem very dissimilar to me.

Anyhow, I've often doubted that Rove is as brilliant as people say.
I'll stop now. This is just smart politics. People are acting as if this is an off-hand, individual comment. Cmon...4 years down the line he mentions this?

Bush's poll numbers are going down. He will be giving a televised speech next week. Obviously this is the turf on which Rove wants to fight: are you for or with the president who is tough on terror. What he understands is that so long as the debate is on that topic it helps his side. Insofar as it goes off to other issues, his side may lose.

It's that simple. Yep, the guy is brilliant.

Or maybe I'm just buzzed. I had an extra glass of chianti with dinner tonight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Knowing Rove this probably is some elaborate trick that will rake in the votes in 06. ~;)

Im sure glad he's on our side, but of course no one that smart could be liberal. (Yea i meant it to be vague.)

---

http://www.cswu.cz/characters/movies/tarkin.jpg


~;)

Star Wars right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

How about this

So in that case it must be those like Red who want to be called moderates when in reality their just denying their liberals just because of stuff like this.Liberalism is dead in America. Praise the lord. ~D

---

Gawain. Thanks for making the point for me. (See, Proletariat, Gawain agrees with what I said, he just didn't realize it) The 48% of us who voted the other way are all tagged as liberals no matter what our political leanings by those hate filled christians who don't act like christians.

I'm still rabidly anti-PC, favoring accuracy over BS. Hmmm...that was a big issue about 15 years ago and PC was beaten down appropriately. I got a kick out of Limbaugh back when he was going after the PC crowd. Got stale pretty quick as he started taking himself far too seriously. How is he doing with his drug rehab, by the way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

Gawain. Thanks for making the point for me. (See, Proletariat, Gawain agrees with what I said, he just didn't realize it)

---

Maybe we all agree on everything and these arguments are like an atheist screaming into the sky at a non-existent God, "I don't believe in you!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red Harvest

The 48% of us who voted the other way are all tagged as liberals no matter what our political leanings by those hate filled christians who don't act like christians.

---

Irony, thy name is Red Harvest.

:tongueg:

Quote:

---

The 48% of us who voted the other way are all tagged as liberals no matter what our political leanings by those hate filled christians who don't act like christians.

---

Ahh ok I see where his ideology comes from. I thought it went deeper than this, but I guess he just doesnt like Christians.. no wonder he hates the president so much.

If you let someone talk long enough, their true feelings come out eventually. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Ahh ok I see where his ideology comes from. I thought it went deeper than this, but I guess he just doesnt like Christians.. no wonder he hates the president so much.

If you let someone talk long enough, their true feelings come out eventually. ~;)

---

No, I'm Christian and I don't hate myself or my family. I certainly don't like some of the views of my fellow Christians. I have very deep doubts about their faith. It is certainly enough to test my faith at times. Comments like yours above are decidedly unchristian. I refer to your type as the pharisees.

I don't believe much of the President's supposed religious righteousness. From him I see mostly contempt, hatred, and arrogance--not characteristics of a good Christian. I don't hate the man, I hate his actions and his delusional idea that he is leading a crusade, a "righteous presidency."

Fwiw, I was really just teasing you about the choice of words. Someone was gonna jump on it sooner or later.

I sincerly apologize for my false assumption.

By the way, did you here those secretly taped conversations with the president that came out a while ago? I think the guy was trying to sell a book.

In any event, he seemed to be a good person from those tapes.

the thing is - i never called for Dean or Durbin to resign or apoligize

to say that Rove must do either is foolishness

how can they apoligize if that is what they believe?
unless they break some sort of encoded or ethical law they should never be forced to apologize.

i agree that this generalization may not have been the best placed, but what the hell? he is a human being

i think durban and dean are morons - but i never expected them to apoligize
that is really absurd - what Rove said wasnt even terrible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Irony, thy name is Red Harvest.

:tongueg:

---

Simply a nomme de guerre for gaming, not any different than having a sports team name. I chose it as a neutral name for Civil War Generals II something like 8 years ago, and as one that was unlikely to be duplicated. It did play on the grim reaper theme. My hair was a redder then too, so it fit.

It has been amusing at times. Playing IL-2 some took the name as anti-communist, while others took it as being communist. (I usually flew Luftwaffe because the VVS planes were too easy to win with.) When you take flak from both sides, you can be reasonably certain you've chosen a neutral name. Apparently, there is a Danish band (or some such) with the same name.

Better story than how I got my user name. I think I heard Stewie from the Family Guy say, "Eviscerate the proletariat!" in the background while I was registering at the org. It made me laugh a bit so I went with it.

I get the commie stuff too, needless to say.