Syndicated columnist Robert Novak is standing by his unsourced reporting that agents for Hillary Clinton spread a rumor that she had “scandalous information†about Barack Obama but wasn’t going to release it. “This is very similar to the kind of trick that Richard Nixon used to pull, where he would say, ‘I know some very bad information about the communists supporting George McGovern, but I can’t put that out because it wouldn’t be right, but I’m just too good of a guy,’†Novak told Fox News.
Obama called on Clinton to “either make public any and all information referred to in the item or concede the truth: that there is none.†But Clinton’s camp suggested that the rumor was spread by Republicans, fed to “a columnist of questionable credibility,†and that Obama was naive to fall for the trap.
Novak said that’s standard operating procedure. “The whole method of the Clinton campaign is when anything derogatory comes up, they say the Republicans are spreading it,†he said. “But there was no Republicans involved in any of my reporting on this.â€
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- LonnythePlumber on Jail consultants straining patience
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
138 Comments
So, apparently, Novak admits that a ‘friend of a friend’ told him about the alleged information being held by Clinton about Obama.
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/novak_admits_that_hillaryobama_smear_column_is_second_hand.php
Great to see that ‘liberal media’ gleefully serving as the conduit for unsourced, second-hand hit pieces peddled by discredited GOP hacks like Novak.
When will the ‘liberal media’ get tired of being the GOP’s bitch? Not anytime soon, evidently.
I wouldn’t listen to anyone that would be an instrument into outing a cia agent.
Novak is a despicable little troll. You know he’s lying because he’s still breathing.
Agreed.
The Dems should make a deal with the Repubes: every time they spread lies, then the Dems get to willfully spread lies too.
For instance, the Dems should now claim that Giuliani is dishing dirt on Fred Thompson.
Although when Bush spread the rumor that McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child in SC, the media didn’t even bother to report it.
IOKIYAR.
If Novak told me he’d seen a house that was painted blue, I’d figure it was probably orange.
The man already destroyed his credibility. He ought to retire.
I think the Democrats ought to go back to Harry Truman’s comment during the 1948 campaign.
“If the Republicans stop telling lies about me, I’ll stop telling the truth about them.”
The Republicans couldn’t stop, of course, so HST kept telling the truth.
And “Dewey Defeats Truman” was the headline.
;-)
“Novak said that’s standard operating procedure”
The standard operating procedure if Traitor Novak smearing Democrats in general and Clinton in particular.
Yup, MH, and that was when RepubliCONs weren’t half as bad as they are now.
BTW, I left you a message at your blog.
Novak “outed” Valerie Plame by looking up her name in Joe Wilson’s biogarphy in “Who’s Who in America.”
That really is evil.
Plame must’ve been in deep, deep, deep cover to have her name in “Who’s Who.”
Funny . . . that’s not what Novak said to the Grand Jury.
You’d think that such a handy out would have been used by NoFacts, but you Marlin know more than even what NoFacts claims . . .
They could of just cancelled the entire investigation and trial, if ONLY they had talked to Marlin!
hahaha!
phantom and ben
NOBODY was ever charged with “outing” Plame.
Therefore, Plame was NOT “outed” — or at least not in the criminal sense.
What Novak did was no more criminal than the Eagle, or this Blog, or any of the posters, commenting on what Novak did.
Once out, you are OUT.
Period.
(In other words, NO CRIME!)
By the way, libs:
Novak is not my favorite columnist. He is anti-Israel much of the time. He is an honest man, however.
I believe him on this one.
Hillary Clinton is one of the most ruthless politicians in American history.
Hillary was in charge of the “bimbo erruptions” in the Clinton White House.
If she can intimidate her husbands victims, I think she can be rather rough on her political opponents, as well.
Paul – I think Novak said otherwise – that Armitage outed her.
Paul – you believe him only because you want to. Maybe I should believe Capn’s suggestion above “Giuliani is dishing dirt on Fred Thompson.” Or maybe that it’s Giuliana behind the push polls against Romney in New Hampshire.
BenDUHHHHHHHHHHWhat did I say?Once out, you are out?
Is that not what I said?
So if Armitage “outed” Plame, why wasnt Armitage charged with a crime? (Other than the fact that Armitage is NOT an Ally of George W. Bush?)
Armitage was not charged with a crime precisely because Plame was already “out”, prior, even to Armitage saying anything about Plame.
Novak has been called a “traitor” on this thread.
That is grossly unfair.
Plame and Wilson are the true traitors. They both lied, they both put personal politics ahead of the national interest.
Hillary is a nasty, dirty, cheap political operative.
No matter what happens over the next several years, history will not treat Hillary kindly.
She is a moth drawn to the flame of power.
Her personal style and her gutter, hard-ball politics will turn the stomachs of most thoughtful people.
If she wins the White House, it will ruin what is left of her “good name”.
She simply can’t take the “fish bowl” scrutiny.
FBI FilesRose Law Firm billing recordsTravel OfficeBimbo EruptionsWhite WaterCastle GrandeMadison Guarantee Savings and loanIllegal, foreign campaign money
— Much, much more to come.
She is a ruthless, dishonest, power hungry, dirty politician.
Most people will believe Novak.
However, some Democrats actually admire Hillary for her evil traits.
“Hillary is a nasty, dirty, cheap political operative”
GOOD! That means she can deal with the Repukes. Welcome to modern politics Paul!
You call it evil. I call it DEALING WITH evil. REPUKE EVIL!
BenHillary intimidated the victims of Bill Clinton.
You admire that behavior.
This is what turns the stomachs of thoughtful people.
This is why Hillary will not be admired by the public at large.
Hillary has been protected by the press.
As President, she won’t get the “kid gloves” treatment, and the public will be shocked to know the true Hillary:
“Hillary publicly announcing, “I am proud that my husband has stood up as president to confront the violence and to protect American women.” But Kuiper also accurately recounts how Hillary privately revealed a complete lack of concern for “protecting women against violence” when she asked to meet Juanita Broaddrick just weeks after Juanita had been raped by Bill Clinton. Hillary was willing to do whatever it took to prevent Juanita from holding her husband accountable for an unspeakable act of violence.
Kuiper also quotes Hillary Clinton as saying of the many women who have reported having sexual encounters with Bill Clinton (forced or otherwise): “These women are all trash. Nobody’s going to believe them.” This is hardly how “Jesus himself” would respond to women reporting what often amounted to sexual mistreatment, and we doubt that He would “crucify” Gennifer Flowers for daring to disclose her affair with Hillary’s husband — even though Bill Clinton himself eventually admitted under oath to having the affair with Flowers. Hillary professes to be “a voice for America’s children,” yet at an event with preschoolers at the governor’s mansion as first lady of Arkansas Mother Clinton was overheard on the intercom system saying, “I want to get this s— over with and get these damn people out of here.” Hillary has not demonstrated a consistent track record of treating women and children — at least children not her own — with care and concern. She was certainly quick enough to demand that taxpayers fund a pool for the governor’s mansion while first “lady” of Arkansas.”
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14735
Paul – you are a lair. I never said I admired what you claim. Why do you lie so much?
As for “Hillary intimidated the victims of Bill Clinton” PROVE IT!
I DO admire her when she strikes back at liars like you. Also I like it when she strikes back at the liars you admire. And I hope she installs a tough AG who go after the liars and cheats you admire so much.
And as for who is spreading dirt on Obama? None other than Paul’s HumanEvents.com link!
Well, let’s see, B Husien Obama is an admitted cocaine user. What could Hillary have on him worse than that?
Maybe she has a picture of him snorting it off the butt of a 10 year old boy. No, that wouldn’t hurt him, he’s a democrat.
Besides, when Hillary got the 1100 plus FBI records, B Husien Obama wasn’t important enough to be on her radar. He’s probably safe, for now.
BenYou said that you Democrats needed a gutterball politician like Hillary because you want someone that can fight Republicans, did you not? Well, why dont I just copy and paste what you said:____
“”Hillary is a nasty, dirty, cheap political operative”
GOOD! That means she can deal with the Repukes. Welcome to modern politics Paul!
You call it evil. I call it DEALING WITH evil. REPUKE EVIL!
Posted by: Ben | November 19, 2007 at 03:27 PM
—-You think it is “good” that Hillary has these traits. You do not deny that Hillary has these traits.Look up the word “admire” in your dictionary.I used the word accurately. You admire Hillary for her dirty political tactics.I lied about nothing.
Lookit Econ101, lying about everything.
Throw enough mud, Econ101 and his corps of GOP hacks think, and something will stick, eventually.
You lie about everything, Paulie. It’s funny, though, to watch you and the other GOP he-men crying like scared little girls over the prospect of President Hillary. As if anything she could possibly do to destroy the Constitution hadn’t already been done by George Bush.
Rational folks, Econ101, call your pathology “Hillary Derangement Syndrome.” Judging by your hysterical dishonesty, you haven’t given them much reason to reconsider their judgment.
This is Hillary in her own words:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/hillaryclinton/a/hillaryquotes.htm
Hank Price,
Regarding your slimy suggestion that Barack Obama is a child molester: that’s the kind of campaign tactic I’d expect from someone, like you, who supports a candidate who helped parole a convicted rapist in order to discredit Bill Clinton, and then lied about having done so after said rapist went on to rape and kill again.
http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.aspx?ArticleID=154e1aad-fd18-4efd-8d80-b5dab8559419
The candidate’s name? Mike Huckabee.
Paul – it is an unfortunate reality that whoever is the Democratic nominee will have to deal with Repukes like you and Rove who will stoop to anything. Yes, I admire a person who can fight back against evil.
However, that in no way proves you allegation about intimidating so-called victims. THAT I would not admire. And THAT is what you lied about.
And, yes, Hillary hired people to harass Bill Clinton’s victims:
http://www.hillaryproject.com/index.php?/en/story-details/pi_admits_hillary_paid_him_to_harass_willey/
Read Novak’s book. And he is saying it publicly.
He is yet to be refuted by anyone except the mental giants that post on this blog.
When asked why would a low-level diplomat without any intelligence experience would be sent to track down the uranmium rumor, Armitage said because his wife Valerie, works at the CIA.
The whole “outing” the CIA agents is one of the more exaggerated things in recent US political history.
Thanks CF2K – shows Huckabee to be a typical Repuke. They will ALL stoop to anything. And then their admirers whine when someone fights back.
Another unsubstantiated claim from the Clinton-haters:
“Asked by WND to respond, the San Francisco-based Palladino recalled speaking at the conference and said he might have met Morgan, but he emphatically denied having a conversation that bore any resemblance to her claims and suggested several times he could sue the KSFO talk host for libel.
“It’s total fantasy,” he told WND. “No, that’s too kind; it’s a lie.” “
Q: When can you tell if Paul Rossell is lying?
A: When his lips are moving or his keyboard is making clicking sounds.
A2: When he quotes professional Clinton-haters.
Ben,
Indeed. They can dish it out, but can’t take it when someone upends the asymmetrical media construct they’ve created.
It’s a sign of how far they are into their bizarro world that flat-out denials such as Palladino’s just affirm their conviction that the one issuing the denial is lying. It’s like the Wingnut insistence that Saddam shipped all his weapons to Syria: evidence to the contrary just bounced off the articles of Wingnut faith.
Econ101,
Why don’t you just post rest stop graffitti? It’s as credible as the Hillary conspiracy theory sites you can’t help yourself from linking to.
My my, a whole thread of snips and snaps. :)
so true kansas.
Changing the subject – I’d like to see you ‘photoshop’ (or whatever) your licence plate idea. Think of the hills and turbines a bit distant to the rest – a sort of depth look.
It’s too bad my art skills are non-existant.
The Clintons RUN an attack machine.And then the Clinton loyalists go nuts and say that Republicans are “dirty” when we expose the Clinton attack machine!:
http://users.aol.com/patriot888/badthngs.txt
CF2K
Israel just bombed a weapons site in Syria.Of course, those weapons making systems came from North Korea.
However, it does look like Syria is “in the market” for WMD’s, does it not?
WAH! In a world with Karl Rove one should not unilaterally disarm.
Just for Paulie:
July 14, 2003 – Robert Novak’s ” Mission to Niger” column is published. This is the first published mention of Joseph Wilson’s wife’s name, her employment at the CIA, and her role in his trip to Niger. In the sixth of ten paragraphs, Novak writes, “Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson ’s wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him.” The column does not describe her as a covert agent, then, but it does name her as “Valerie Plame” – her maiden and cover name. Novak gives conflicting accounts of whether Mrs. Wilson instigated her husband’s trip or was asked by others to do so. (Novak, “The Mission to Niger,” Chicago Sun-Times, July 2003).
http://www.factcheck.org/society/the_wilson-plame-novak-rove_blame_game.html
BenNEWSWEEK says that this slime bag PI, Palladino, worked for the Clinton campaign.
When did Newsweek become a “right wing” rag? lol:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Palladino
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Their_Lives:_The_Women_Targeted_by_the_Clinton_Machine
He worked for them. He also said your person LIED about him.
“It’s total fantasy,” he told WND. “No, that’s too kind; it’s a lie.” ”
I didn’t deny that Clinton hired people to help defend him from you mud-slingers. He had seen what you did to McCain in South Carolina. But being prepared to withstand dirty tricks does not constitute dirty tricks.
StevenThis is America
I do not have to prove that Novak is innocent.
You do not have to prove that Wilson and Plame are innocent.
However, I can prove that Wilson and Plame lied.
Wilson told the CIA, orally, that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger. Wilson later lied in his Op-Ed piece, claiming the opposite.
Wilson also claimed, in his Op-Ed piece, that he saw some forged documents. Wilson later admited that he had NO knowledge of those documents, and that they became public long after his Niger trip and his ORAL (not written, another lie) report to the CIA.
Wilson also claimed that his wife, and political hack partner, Valerie Plame, had NOTHING to do with his mission to Niger.
That is another lie.
Plame and Wilson are political hacks.
They are both proven liars.
You can not say the same thing about Novak.
BenYou believed Clinton every time he lied.You will doubtless believe Clinton’s paid PI every time he lies.
I have it on good authority from an un-named secret source that Rudy Giulini is indeed hoarding dirt on Thompson. The story is that Thompson is involved in a torrid affair with Mitt Momney and that Huckabee is jealous.
Giuliani will release the information right before the New Hampshire primary.
“They are both proven liars.”
Not proven Paul.
“You believed Clinton every time he lied.”
No Paul, that is yet another lie. When Bill Clinton wagged his finger and said “I did not have sex … ” I groaned and rolled my eyes. I also did the same to “I did not inhale … “
PaulBut you believe Bush every time he lies – and you STILL claim those WMDs were spirited off to Mars or someplace.
. . . and Novak looked up her name in “Who’s Who.”
Who is lying? How was Plame outed if her name is in “Who’s Who”?
By the way, Ben:
If the PI told the truth, about his actions and his clients, anywhere but under legal oath and obligation to tell the truth, that PI would probably be in breach of contract.
The PI had to lie.
Only 15% of Iowa Democrats think that Hillary is the “most trustworthy” candidate.
Darn, I want Hillary to WIN the primary.
Maybe we need to be nice to her for awhile?
By the way, that “right winger” George Stephanopolis, gave me those poll results, above!
Marlin Dumbsh*t–
Novak wrote in his column that “Two senior administration officials told me Wilson ’s wife suggested sending him . . . ”
So was Novak lying in his column or lying in his book when he said her name was in “Who’s Who.”
And, Marlin, why did the CIA itself insist that the Justice Dept. investigate if the info was in “Who’s Who?”
And lastly, Marlin, have you got a link for your assertion.
Because if you don’t, then stuff it.
Hey, Econ?
If you’re upset with Democratic candidates, why don’t you write to your State Representative–
RAJ GOYLE.
Hehehehe.
“Maybe she has a picture of him snorting it off the butt of a 10 year old boy. No, that wouldn’t hurt him, he’s a democrat.”That’s what Repub. politicians call doing crack cocaine!
So she was listed in Who’s Who as : Valerie Plame aka Valerie Wilson ;Occupation- Covert Agent, Nuclear Non-proliferation specialist.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/19/AR2007111900940.html?hpid=topnews
Hillary falls behind Obama in latest Iowa poll
Illinois Senator Barack Obama gets the support of 30 percent of likely Democratic caucus-goers in Iowa, compared to 26 percent for Clinton, 22 percent for former senator John Edwards and 11 percent for New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. The results are only marginally changed from a Post-ABC poll in late July, but in a state likely to set the course for the rest of the nominating process, there are significant signs of progress for Obama — and harbingers of concern for Clinton.
I will take a
Congressman over a state rep anyday.Especially when Goyle will go no further!
capnBOTH are true, Plame the political hack phoney WAS in whos who, and was also already out.
Beyond that, the CIA does not have ANY authority over American citizens accused of a crime.
The opinion of the CIA is not even as strong as the opinion of a prosecutor,
And, this special prosecutor prosecuted NOONE for “outing” the political hack Plame!
Interesting poll Capn. Also looks like a bit of a drop for Edwards and a rise for my #1 choice Richardson.
BenI will say that Richardson is the best out of the pack, on your side.However, I dont want you to pick your best!
Holy smokes…People just need to grow up and take it like a man. Thats the problem with this world. We all know that Hillary is already President. Who’s going to be laughing loudest at the end? We all know its a conspiracy…Bush…Clinton…Bush…Clinton…The journalists are just doing their job…spinning information that’s already been spun!!
And Paul, I would take the worst on my side over the ‘best’ (sic) on your side.
I heard Novak on Hannity and on O’Reilly (the slightly kookier Mike Smerconish sitting in).
Novak says he has this from TWO Democrats.
Uh huh.
Any Democrat on encounter with Robert Novak aint gonna share info with him. They’d grab a mallet and pound a stake through the place where Novak’s heart should be. The man is a malignancy.
Heh heh, I remember seeing Michael Moore turn Novak into full blown melt down once. Funny stuff.
Ah yes….
Who truly is the party of such hate?
You need look no farther than those posters here who give us such a wonderful example of complete irrational hate towards someone.
Next week will you call Novak a terrorist?
Dick Morris knows the Clintons better than anyone. This is what he has to say on this matter:
http://www.newsmax.com/morris/clinton_obama/2007/11/19/50691.html
A link to newsmax?
Oh you never fail to humor us Paulecon.
The other day, Bill O’Reilly said that the Bible was written 5000 years ago. Keith Olberman and others called him on it.
You know, since the balance of the Bible was written 2000 years ago?
Newsmax says O’Reilly was taken out of context. That his inflection when he SAID “5000 years ago” was an obvious exaggeration.
Go get me a link to a comic book Pauliecon. I’ll take it with all the seriousness anything from you or Robert Novak deserves.
Nathan
The left thinks you “hate” them when you disagree with them.
They are tender, fragile creatures.
JRWhen have I ever defended Bill O’Reilly?Your bias shows clearly, on this one.While I think O’Reilly does a better job than anyone on CNN, CBS, NBC or ABC, O’Reilly is NOT a true conservative, in my opinion.O’Reilly is a calculating populist.He is not a leader. He never takes a tough position and then tries to make the case for that position.O’Reilly has his finger in the wind, much like the Clintons.He has a right to do what he does, but, again, he is not even in my top 10 or top 20 of favorite national media figures.
Pauliecon?
You are gonna have to try harder. Keep up.
You posted a link to newsmax. I discredited newsmax for defending O”Reilly.
Now YOU attack O’Reilly?
You are out of feet to shoot yourself in.
JRYour media networks have run false story after false story after false story.Bogus Dan Rather National Guard “documents”Bogus, phoney soldier stories that had to be retracted.Exploding pick up trucks, that were actually boobytraped for special effects.Fake stories about poor welfare moms.The journalistic scandals from the liberal media elites has been documented time and time again.
That O’Reilly said something dumb is not much of an addition to this thread, and is no skin off of my nose.
O’Reilly does not lead.
Therefore, I do not follow him.
JRAgain, you defend all of the proven fraud and falsehoods in YOUR media, and I will then feel obligated to defend Newsmax and O’Reilly.
Frankly, O’Reilly is not one of my favorites, by a long shot, but he doesnt come close to the fraud Dan Rather tried to pull off with those fake Air Guard documents, does he?
JRYou need to understand something:
America is conservative.
You, JR, are a liberal.
Democrats win by pretending to be conservatives or moderates.
Having said that, since the Conservative movement is so huge, we do not and can not walk in lockstep on everything.
YOU, JR, went after O’Reilly and you are disappointed that I did not rise to defend the man.
It shows.
Don’t hide behind that Newsmax link explanation. O’Reilly was your target.
Newsmax runs stories on EVERY political figure.
Republicans win by being conservative.
Either way, you never win, because nobody really agrees with you.
JRYour media networks have run false story after false story after false story.
Last I checked, I own no media networks there Paulecon.
Bogus Dan Rather National Guard “documents”
The story was true. The documents questionable.
Bogus, phoney soldier stories that had to be retracted.
I THINK Rush Limbaugh has a trademark on the term phony soldiers. HE uses it to describe any vet that is against the Iraq war.
Exploding pick up trucks, that were actually boobytraped for special effects.
No one let alone me has any idea what you are talking about here.
Fake stories about poor welfare moms.
Again Paulecon, you are ranting. Do clue us as to what you are talking about?
The journalistic scandals from the liberal media elites has been documented time and time again.
Broad statement. Got a link? One?
That O’Reilly said something dumb is not much of an addition to this thread, and is no skin off of my nose.
O’Reilly does not lead.
Therefore, I do not follow him.
Posted by: Econ101 | November 19, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Want me to beat you up some more Paulecon? Or have you had enough?
Either way, you never win, because nobody really agrees with you.
Posted by: Econ101 | November 19, 2007 at 10:32 PM
Check you own local state rep there Pauliecon!:)
Recapping as Paulecon leaves our world to return to his own.
Paulecon post link to newsmax.
I discredit newsmax.
Paul discredits newsmax.
Paul come back now ya hear?
I must have blinked and missed it.
Exactly where did JR discredit Newsmax?
The other day, Bill O’Reilly said that the Bible was written 5000 years ago. Keith Olberman and others called him on it.
You know, since the balance of the Bible was written 2000 years ago?
Newsmax says O’Reilly was taken out of context. That his inflection when he SAID “5000 years ago” was an obvious exaggeration.
There ya go Nathan.
JRThe media scandals have gone back many, many years.Not too long ago, one of the major networks faked, with boobytraps, some truck explosions and said that GM made dangerous trucks:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/LIE/nbc.html
As far as the Bush Air Guard stories go, you are lying JR, I already proved, on this Blog, that Bush served honorably in a high risk job:
http://nationalreview.com/owens/owens200402090833.asp
Phoney soldier?JR, you thought that Rush using that term would ruin Rush, remember? You foolishly jumped on that story, only to be humiliated like Harry Reid.You libs, with your hate and lies, helped Limbaugh raise millions of dollars for his favorite charity, a pro-military charity!:
“Here is a Morning Update that we did recently, talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. They have their celebrities and one of them was Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth. Now, he was a “corporal.” I say in quotes. Twenty-three years old. What made Jesse Macbeth a hero to the anti-war crowd wasn’t his Purple Heart; it wasn’t his being affiliated with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. No. What made Jesse Macbeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage, in their view, off the battlefield, without regard to consequences. He told the world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq, American soldiers killing unarmed civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth describes the horrors this way: “We would burn their bodies. We would hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque.” Now, recently, Jesse Macbeth, poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. And you know what? He was sentenced to five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim and his Army discharge record. He was in the Army. Jesse Macbeth was in the Army, folks, briefly. Forty-four days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse Macbeth isn’t an Army Ranger, never was. He isn’t a corporal, never was. He never won the Purple Heart, and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen. You probably haven’t even heard about this. And, if you have, you haven’t heard much about it. This doesn’t fit the narrative and the template in the Drive-By Media and the Democrat Party as to who is a genuine war hero. Don’t look for any retractions, by the way. Not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread Jesse Macbeth’s lies about our troops, because the truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities because they can’t find any that fit the template of the way they see the US military. In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.[6]“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid-Limbaugh_letter_controversy
JRYou really are very, very uninformed.
Nathan writes,
“Who truly is the party of such hate?
“You need look no farther than those posters here who give us such a wonderful example of complete irrational hate towards someone.”
******
Ann Coulter’s latest book about liberals–GODLESS
Ann Coulter’s previous book about liberals–TREASON
Rush Limbaugh joke about the new White House dog–Chelsea Clinton.
Jerry Falwell’s videotape alleging that Bill Clinton had Vince Foster murdered
Pat Robertson agreeing with Jerry Falwell that the 9-11 attack was because America tolerated homosexuality
Who are the “haters” again, Nate?
Your only post here is attacking me Nathan.
Perhaps you should keep up better?
Defending Paulecon now too? And you also defend “kansas”JM?
This forum begins to have very serious doubts as to your credibility Nathan. And, I should say some posters question your reason.
Paulecon? You’re ranting again. Haven’t you made ass enough of yourself?
JR,
How does that discredit Newsmax?
Where am I attacking you JR?
JR,Name a single media outlet that has not had to retract a false story in the last 10 years, would you please?You love to pounce on any link to any outlet a conservative posts on this Blog.So, tell us, JR, where is your “fountain of truth”??
You obviously are not completely stupid, since you do not post your “media matters” “moveon.org” and other nut cake sources.
The fact that you jumped on the “phoney soldiers” Limbaugh comment, without checking out your wack job sources, is proof enough that you don’t do any research of your own.
Econ–
You must really be p*ssed.
Clinton made all that money for you and your clients.
Over the last seven years though, Bush’s Dow seems to have erectile dysfunction . . . it goes up and then comes right back down again.
‘Course that’s the way to make money while Commander Cod-Piece is in office . . . bet against the US economy.
JR
Are you using the “royal we” again?
JR, a legend in HIS OWN MIND!
—-This forum begins to have very serious doubts as to your credibility Nathan. And, I should say some posters question your reason.
Paulecon? You’re ranting again. Haven’t you made ass enough of yourself?
Posted by: J R | November 19, 2007 at 11:06 PM
I HEARD Rush make the phony soldiers comment live there paul.
I got the uncut version, unlike the troops in Iraq who got the cut and edited armed services version.
Looking to drag Nathan to your defense Paul?
He’s made that mistake before.
You speak for NOONE other than yourself JR.
Nobody!
You are alone.
Completely and totally alone.
There isn’t an elected official on the face of the Earth that holds all of your political views.
Not one.
So, Please, speak for yourself and noone else.
JR,
You might have heard it live, but it seems you still didn’t get the context.
And check the dollar, dropping like a stone.
We’re like freaking Argentina . . .
JR
You are a liar.
Limbaughs comments were never “cut” and the military loves Limbaugh.
He has the most popular show on “Armed Forces Radio”.
You don’t know what you are talking about, and you are deliberately lying when you continue your falsehoods, even after you have been proven wrong.
Anybody on this forum speak for or with YOU Paulecon?
JR,
It is not so much in defense of Econ101, but in response to what you are trying to say.
The people you defend and consort with here are hardly any better.
Actually, some of those are even worse than Kansas has ever been.
But feel free to keep thinking you are the self proclaimed blog king.
JR,
I would take Econ101 over Linda, WS Clark, Chas, Apophis, CapnAmerica, The Phantom, Sugar, ., :., * and several others any day of the week.
CapnThe stock market has almost nothing to do with who is in the White House.
Harry Dent predicted the boom in the 90’s, before Clinton was even elected.
Most of that boom was due to the baby-boomers entering their peak earning and investing years.
By the way, POINT to a Clinton policy that had anything at all to do with the economy, would you please?
Ooooo you stepped in it again paulie.
I’m not the expert with links.
But EVERYONE knows the version of Rush Limbaugh re:phony soldiers was cleaned up for air on armed services radio.
This is another moment like when you lied on me and said you had an email about me Paulecon.
Great, Nathan, and we would gladly let you have them.
JRI gave you this link once before. You can set up your own page and truly be in charge:
http://www.myspace.com/
JR,
Obviously not “everyone” knows that.
I don’t.
The only person here who is making things up is you in regards to what Limbaugh meant when he said that.
Well that speaks alot to your character Nathan.
You posted a hypothetical that was wrong and you said so.
Paulecon posted an outright lie about me. I can go get it for you if you like.
JRI did not, ever, lie about you.Every word I said was true.
By the way, POINT to a Clinton policy that had anything at all to do with the economy, would you please?
Posted by: Econ101 |
Easy — running a budget surplus and paying down the national debt.
And don’t give me that crap about “Congress passes the budgets.” The White House directs the budget and can veto any bill it doesn’t like.
BTW, the baby boomer crap won’t fly either.
The first boomer just retired this year. What were they doing for the last six?
econpaul, I can prove otherwise.
You are already a discredited paraih here. Would you care to be proven worse?
JR,
And your running around here like the liberals here who you team up with are innocent as new born babies while trying to run off Kansas and others for being “bad” is very telling of your character.
WoW this might turn out to be a great 2008 election year!!
JR,
Econ101 is hardly a discredited paraih here.
Now look who is attacking a poster here, you!
Why don’t you run yourself off?
JRWhy must you get so petty?
You got upset with me for not posting on every thread. You acted almost like an employer, your weird, control freak personality was comming through rather strong.
I replied that I would post when and where I felt like posting.
I then noted that you seemed to avoid the substance abuse threads.
I then got a weird, angry email from a woman, I presumed, that defended you.
That email may well have actually been from YOU, since you have sent me threatening emails, before.
In any event, it was my mistake for presuming it was either from you or from a friend or girlfriend of yours.
In any event, I never lied. I simply pointed out the facts and events, as they occured.
“Me thinks thou does protest too much” lol
If it isnt true, why the hell cant you just drop it?
It is petty.
Let it go!
Calling you a drunk or a druggie sure doesnt add up to the libels you have stacked on me. You have called me:
QueerChickenhawkMedically DischargedScab
And many other things. I only bring them up when you go into your crybaby routine about how awful I have been to you.
Is that who you are defending Nathan?
Paul?
I use against you only what you bring here.
IF you have an email about me I have invited you to share it…or invent it.
Why do you want me to let it go?
If I posted a lie about you, would you let it go?
You can’t win against these people, J R.
When dealing with the irrational, one wins by walking away.
Capn
The PEAK earning and investing years are what counts.Read Dent.He isnt always right, but he was way ahead of the 90’s boom.
Capn
The PEAK earning and investing years are what counts.Read Dent.He isnt always right, but he was way ahead of the 90’s boom.
Then feel free to walk away CapnAmerica.
I won’t stop you.
I stand by everything I have ever said about you Paulecon.
The difference between us is I use only what you bring here.
JRI DO let your lies go, UNTIL you call me a liar.
I have never lied on this Blog.
Not once.
You are like the little brother who picks and picks and picks on his older brother. Then, when the older brother throws a cup of milk in your face, you cry to your mommy about how mean the older brother is to you.
And, you hope the older kid gets in trouble.
JR,
Defending? I am just pointing out your hypocrisy on the subject.
In joining Paulecon Nathan, I think you just made it my mission to stop you.
So, you think I am BOTH a Chickenhawk (your word) AND Medically discharged?
How is that possible?
A rhetorical question, of coarse.
You “stand” on lies JR.
Your statements contradict each other.
Nobody is smart enough to be a good liar, JR.
You arent even smart enough to be a bad liar.
The PEAK earning and investing years are what counts.Read Dent.He isnt always right, but he was way ahead of the 90’s boom.
Posted by: Econ101
Wouldn’t the peak earning years be right before retirement?
Exactly Econ101.
He and others did the same thing to Kansas.
They poke and poke and poke and poke him till he finally says something and then they jump on him for that.
You see it all the time and it is not just against Kasnas.
They will do it to me in the Evolution threads and religion threads and gun threads.
And you will notice some crazy nics jumping in on the action too.
The only thing I have ever protested is your lies on me Paul F Rosell.
And yes it is personal.
Whine about how you treat me? Hardly, and everyone knows it. It is you who in desperation reached too far and made a fool of yourself.
All because you cannot acquit yourself well here.
I won’t stop you.Posted by: Nathan
You CAN’T stop me. You have no effect on me whatsoever except perhaps as road-kill has on the motorist, stinking to high-heaven as one rolls past.
JR
Was that a threat JR?
Kind of like what you guys keep hounding Kansas for doing?
What are you going to do? Troll me to death?
Oh no! *gasp*
Nathan don’t stand with this guy you are better than that.
JR,
Dont stand with Linda, Chas, CapnAmerica, ., *, .:, Apophis, Roo-ster, Steven, Sugar…
You are better than that.
Or ya know what? DO stand with paulecon Nathan.
Maybe he will let YOU see the email he says he has about me.
Okay, this bickering is why threads get shut down.
I’m out until later.
Later.
I’m gonna go too. I’d like to maintain some respect for Nathan. Since he has none for himself.
See ya!
You might have heard it live, but it seems you still didn’t get the context.
Posted by: Nathan | November 19, 2007 at 11:14 PM
===========================
Wow, Nathan — Everybody who heard what Limbaugh said about phony soldiers, and knows full well what he said is wrong, except for Nathan, and his all seeing, all knowing “truth” –
Just who died and made you God, Nathan? Where did you gain your divine powers of interpretation that make you right, and anybody who disagrees with you wrong?
I also heard Limbaugh live, and I know damned well what the man said. I also read his transcript, and how he cleaned it up, and deleted the “phony soldiers” parts to make it look “ohh soo innocent” — Rush is just a loser looking for other losers to join his bandwagon. I guess he has found some on this Blog!
Just wait till I release my information about Nathan’s torrid affair with Paul! I got it from an un-named anonymous but reliable source.
I think it must be permanently inscribed in the mindsets of Liberals to be insulting, flaming thirteen year olds.
Nothing else can explain their behavior.
I see J R is in his attack mode once again. J R is not happy unless he is attacking someone.
That says a lot about his personality and character.
DNFTT.
In joining Paulecon Nathan, I think you just made it my mission to stop you.
Posted by: J R | November 19, 2007 at 11:42 PM
Here we go! JR is at it again! He is threatening and attacking othe posters.
And the LIBS SUPPORT HIM!!
And the EDITORS OF THE WEBLOG IGNORE HIM.
Ho-hum.
What a bitch fight!!