|
|
| Karl Rove (3900) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|
|
| (3900) | |
Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Nov 24 01:42:55 2004 Anyone want to discuss this shadowy figure? He's been called the secret behind the success of both Bush and the Neoconservative movement in the US, "success" being used loosely, what with results mattering (not relating to who wins what). Goes back to Bush's Texas governorship; got Ann Richards ousted with false claims about her record on crime being bad.Any takers? |
|
|
| (3907) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Wed Nov 24 02:37:02 2004, in response to Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Nov 24 01:42:55 2004. Rasputin? |
|
|
| (3957) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by vfrt on Wed Nov 24 13:15:07 2004, in response to Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Nov 24 01:42:55 2004. How can a guy who was all over TV on election night be described as 'shadowy'? |
|
|
| (4012) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed Nov 24 19:55:57 2004, in response to Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Nov 24 01:42:55 2004. As shadowy as James Carville - just a little more successful. |
|
|
| (4091) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Nov 25 10:51:49 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Wed Nov 24 19:55:57 2004. Depends on how you define "success". |
|
|
| (4093) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Nov 25 10:53:19 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by vfrt on Wed Nov 24 13:15:07 2004. His deeds are shadowy and are not spoken of by the fictitious "liberal media"—but they are spelled out on PBS' "Frontline". |
|
|
| (4099) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Nov 25 11:26:11 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Wed Nov 24 19:55:57 2004. Success = meeting your objectives.Bush was elected while Kerry was not. Rove was successful while carville was not. Republicans are happy while dummocrats are not. Kerry still has $15,000,000 of democratic money - all his friends are happy. |
|
|
| (4100) | |
Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Nov 25 11:30:08 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Nov 25 10:53:19 2004. PBS is not part of the liberal media? I guess that if you don't believe that you can always ask PBS for their opinion. |
|
|
| (4103) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Thu Nov 25 11:39:51 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Thu Nov 25 11:26:11 2004. True enough. Carville does have celebrity earning potential but Rove can get money from the entities that benefited from his electoral success. Neither of them will starve. Besides, Carville's wife is Mary Matalin, who is a Republican strategist. I think it is just a game to all of those folks. |
|
|
| (4176) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:14:22 2004, in response to Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Nov 24 01:42:55 2004. Some more very sour grapes. Karl Rove is a political genius, pure and simple. He orcherstrated the Republicans' surprising victory in the 2002 Mid-term elections when the GOP re-took the Senate after Judas Jeffords bolted to become an "independent" voting with the Democrats. The Republicans also picked up six or seven seats in the House. This year he went one even better, four Senate seats, about five House seats and Governorships in Missouri, Indiana, and maybe Washington if the Demo candidate will stop asking for recounts until she get the one she wants. Rove knew getting the base out was what was needed since 40% of the people consider themselves Conservatives. With some moderates joining it was enough to give my side the win. He is no evil spirit unless you are Democrat. Maybe you guys on the dark side should be looking to cashier Terry McAuliffe because all he can do is raise money. He has a lousy record of winning elections, and that James Carville hasn't been so hot lately himself. |
|
|
| (4178) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:19:26 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by vfrt on Wed Nov 24 13:15:07 2004. Simply because he is a Republican. If he was Terry McAuliffe or James Carville they would be described as colorful, even though they are a couple of losers. What the hell of have they won lately to impress anyone outside of Blather, Broken, and Jebbering? |
|
|
| (4185) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:29:51 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Nov 25 10:51:49 2004. WINNING!!!! WINNING!!!!!!! That is success. That is what Karl Rove has been all about and what your Terry McAuliffe, James Carville, and that mouthy little weasel Paul Begals is not. |
|
|
| (4205) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Nov 25 18:18:13 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:29:51 2004. Heh. You FOUND us! :) |
|
|
| (4242) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 21:05:54 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Thu Nov 25 11:26:11 2004. Hey Dude, hotcha, hotcha, hotcha!!!!!!!!! Couldn't have said it better myself, but all you did is add to the Demos' angst. Can't believe how those guys on the other side as so deep in the blues. Well better them than us. |
|
|
| (4243) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Thu Nov 25 21:10:53 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Thu Nov 25 11:26:11 2004. Hi Fred. 8-) |
|
|
| (4270) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Fri Nov 26 01:53:39 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 21:05:54 2004. Absolutely, Fred! |
|
|
| (4342) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by aem7 on Fri Nov 26 10:59:37 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Fri Nov 26 01:53:39 2004. Yes, I agree with TD here. It's us Kerry people who have egg on our face here. What can I say? I don't think it is so much strategy but more just the inherent idiocy (excluding the present company, esp. not Train Dude who actually has common sense unlike most Republicans) of the majority of the American population.AEM7 |
|
|
| (4358) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 11:33:16 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Nov 25 18:18:13 2004. Yes I did. Actually the Off Post was on my board all the time and I just didn't see it. Hopefully, I won't get too partisan and will give the other side a fair shake, and I would hope my liberal friends will do the same. Hope you had a bang-up Thanksgiving. |
|
|
| (4362) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 11:38:41 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by aem7 on Fri Nov 26 10:59:37 2004. Maybe it's because our side won and I can afford to be magnanimous but those Democrats who are jumping all over John Kerry are way out of line if you ask me. Kerry ran a good campaign, won two of the three debates (one was a tie) and came very close. Look, this is just about a 50-50 country and positions are hardening in both camps. The Dems are making a bid for Arizona, NM, Colorado and Nevada while the GOP is slowly closing in on Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and Pennsylvania. There will be some switching off but the key is registering new voters and getting the big turnout. What amazes me is that none of this seems to be hitting me too hard. I have many Democrat friends and we are still good friends. |
|
|
| (4376) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Nov 26 12:35:56 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 11:38:41 2004. "Maybe it's because our side won"Are you sure your side won? You're retired. How is the country going to pay for the propoed privatization of social security? By reducing payments to retirees (or by a level of inflation so high as to have the same effect). How is the country going to finance the budget deficits that the Republican-controlled GAO says are coming? By inflation, to reduce the real size of the national debt. What are your social security and pension going to be worth after inflation? |
|
|
| (4379) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 13:09:45 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by AlM on Fri Nov 26 12:35:56 2004. Hey AIM, great questions. First of all I am not eligible for Social Security as I am under the California State Retirement System for Teachers. Our benefits are vastly superior to SS and I got in on Medicare years ago when I volunteered to have money taken out of my salary for ten years in order to be eligible. As to the future of SS I really believe if we are going to keep the system as is, then there will have to be a large tax increase, move the eligibility back to 70 or lower benefits, all of which is anathema to the people. Some type of privitization will have to be done for, say, people under 30 or thereabouts while all those older can stay in the old system. Social Security gives you only a 2% increase each year while investing some of your money could give you a lot more if you invest wisely; ex, municipal bonds, T-Bill accounts, etc. I have always been a strong supporter of SS but it is slowly going broke. Having taught history for 35 years, I know that when it went into effect the system had 26 workers for each retired worker. It is now about 4-1 and going down each year somewhat. Some change just has to be made. |
|
|
| (4390) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Fri Nov 26 13:28:26 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by aem7 on Fri Nov 26 10:59:37 2004. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (4394) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Nov 26 13:34:00 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 13:09:45 2004. "Some type of privitization will have to be done for, say, people under 30 or thereabouts while all those older can stay in the old system."And who is going to pay even reduced benefits for the older people if the younger ones are taken out of the system? The only financially sound approach to social security is to reduce/delay benefits for the older people to a moderate degree and NOT privatize, so that the younger people still contribute. If you privatize, you have to reduce/delay benefits to the older people to a radical degree, not a moderate degree. |
|
|
| (4434) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 18:51:23 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by AlM on Fri Nov 26 13:34:00 2004. If we take your suggestion and run with it, then Social Security benefits must NOT be taxed because the recipients will taking a real financial bath. I suppose you can expand it to 68-70, no taxing benefits and try to salt away extra money from government funds into the account, but it still puts the retired worker in a worse state than those who proceeded him. It's a tough nut to crack. |
|
|
| (4442) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Nov 26 21:04:35 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by aem7 on Fri Nov 26 10:59:37 2004. Alexander Tyler, (in his 1770 book, 'Cycle of Democracy' )"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a lousy fiscal responsibility, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage." Guess where we are *NOW*? :( |
|
|
| (4443) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Nov 26 21:11:33 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 11:33:16 2004. Like all holidays, just another 16 hour workday to me. That's why I posted here - folks only see me when I'm at work. :)And as far as the partisan goes, never a problem. Unlike so many of the Rush Limbaugh Jackboot thug crowd, you actually have a POINT when you type and a brain behind the fingers going tippy-tap on the keyboard. I *always* look forward to your views on things because you're not a dogmatic. GLAD to have ya here, bro! |
|
|
| (4447) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Kevin from Midwood on Fri Nov 26 21:30:44 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Nov 26 21:04:35 2004. That's a bogus quote (see Snopes), but H.L. Mencken really did write this:"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." |
|
|
| (4449) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Nov 26 21:39:47 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Kevin from Midwood on Fri Nov 26 21:30:44 2004. Wasn't aware of the bogusness - I always did like that quote though. Mencken's thoughts though are always amusing and true. Even sadder is the state of politics in this country where anyone competent enough for the job is also competent enough to know not to seek it. :(Personally, I think it's time for RUSH to be president. We're there. |
|
|
| (4487) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:19:21 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Nov 26 21:39:47 2004. Rush are Canadian, and there are three of them.Oh, you mean Druggie Limbaugh?? That'll get us nuked for sure. |
|
|
| (4488) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:20:30 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:29:51 2004. WINNING!!!! WINNING!!!!!!! That is successWinning by mendacity is the same as theft. No success there. |
|
|
| (4489) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:23:19 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:14:22 2004. Sour grapes? Oh yeah, another Neoconservative cover-up tactic.Karl Rove wins by dirty tricks and mendacity. Is this what the USA has sunk to? Worry about the "sour grapes" being "eaten" around the world. BTW, I'm no Democrat. I'm an Independent, and a former Republican; moderate in thinking. Don't talk about the "dark side" because that is where you are. |
|
|
| (4490) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:25:51 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Fri Nov 26 18:51:23 2004. The only SSI benefits that are taxed are those of people who collect and still work beyond retirement age.Changing tack: How do you excuse the borrowing from foreign countries and the expansion of national debt thereof? |
|
|
| (4491) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Nov 27 12:27:46 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:19:21 2004. With liberty and Oxycontin for all! :) |
|
|
| (4492) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:27:46 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Thu Nov 25 11:26:11 2004. Success = meeting your objectivesThat qualifies all criminals that haven't been incarcerated/punished as successes. Thought that most of those who voted Bush did so on a "moral" platform? |
|
|
| (4493) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:30:04 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by #4 Sea Beach Fred on Thu Nov 25 16:19:26 2004. Simply because he is a RepublicanPrejudiced Neoconservative reply, that is. You think Neoconservatism is bound by party lines? |
|
|
| (4494) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Nov 27 12:30:22 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:25:51 2004. Now THERE'S an interesting little topic. That borrowing is about to end now that the Euro's up past 1.33 to the dollar. America is now on the tinfoil standard, headed for the ball of twine. Everyone remembers INflation, most of those who remember DEflation though have fortunately (for them) passed on. Next couple of months are going to be "interesting." :( |
|
|
| (4495) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:33:20 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Nov 27 12:30:22 2004. Indeed. This is the Neoconservative's worst fear: the ramifications of this irresponsible fiscal policy, and having to discuss/excuse them. Those who try usually present a false argument full of holes . . . |
|
|
| (4496) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:36:00 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Nov 27 12:27:46 2004. ;-PAn Anthem of the heart, an Anthem of the mind . . . a funeral dirge, for Neocons gone blind . . . |
|
|
| (4506) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:01:35 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:20:30 2004. Democratic rationalization. "Be happy that we are losers!" |
|
|
| (4507) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:06:53 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:23:19 2004. What dirty tricks are you ranting about? Do you mean like the Chicago Democrats casting votes for dead voters to get kennedy elected? Is that what you are referring to? OOOh wait, maybe you mean trying to scare seniors into thinking that their Social Security will be tampered with by the Republicans? Or do you mean trying to scare female voters with the specter of re-instituting the draft? I guess being a dummycrat you get to know dirty tricks pretty well. And don't try to peddle the snake oil about you being an independent. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and has feathers it's a duck - no matter what you want people to believe it is. |
|
|
| (4508) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:11:38 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:27:46 2004. Are you saying that you can only be considered successful if you succeeed at something criminal? And yet it was the democrats that went out of their way to register criminals who were eligable to vote in certain states. I suppose that's because most criminals would be more likely to support liberal dummycratic candidates. |
|
|
| (4509) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Sat Nov 27 18:14:52 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:01:35 2004. 8-) |
|
|
| (4510) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Sat Nov 27 18:23:05 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:06:53 2004. To paraphraise bin laden, The draft is not in the hands of Bush or Kerry... However if events call for a draft, it WILL take place. Personally, I wish that the issue was kept out of the debate because the draft is a strategic decision. These decisions should not be politicized because a commander in chief needs to decide with a clear head. If the situation truly requires a draft, Bush needs to just do it. I'm sure Kerry would do the same. |
|
|
| (4512) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:32:45 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Nov 27 12:20:30 2004. Actually, it seems like the losers are the true whiners. Yet I can't imagine why you losers continue to whine and whine. Can you not accept the inevitable? And yet you have the best of both worlds and you continue to whine like little children when you should be happy. Just think about this! If John Kerry had won he would have followed the policies opposite to those of the REAL PRESIDENT. When those failed policies of Flip-Flop Kerry and the LIBERAL DUMMYCRATS got everything so fucked up you'd have no one to blame. At least with your candidate taking his natural place in the in the world As A True Loser if there are a few bumps along the road following OUR REAL PRESIDENT, at least you losers will be able to say "Whine, whine whine - we told you so . |
|
|
| (4513) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:36:43 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by BIE on Sat Nov 27 18:23:05 2004. This is true. Unfortunately with the liberal dummcrats refusal to unite behind the legitimately elected President, it gives the Fanatical Muslim Extremist followers of bin Laden reason to think they can be victorious against a divided United States. The dummycrats that fought so hard in the House and Senate to institute a draft may force it's need on the blood and bodies of thousand's of innocent American victims once again. |
|
|
| (4525) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Sat Nov 27 21:00:06 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 18:11:38 2004. it was the democrats that went out of their way to register criminals who were eligable to vote in certain states.Good. Ex-cons who've served their time are as eligible to vote as any other citizen. |
|
|
| (4526) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Sat Nov 27 21:15:26 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Nov 27 12:27:46 2004. I would point out that we survived Ronald Reagan, and pundits of the time tended to point put the flaws. The BIG difference between RWR and GWB is that the latter has no sense of either humor or humility. Ron had both, and used it to advange. You may not have liked him or voted for him, but he never held that against even those who were against his policies.Since the WWW wasn't around at that item, neither was cable TV as we know it, the mass paranoia and the "division of the country" wasn't broadcast 24/7.It has been said "The Lord looks after fools, drunks and the United States". Sometimes I believe it's true. |
|
|
| (4528) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Sat Nov 27 21:17:36 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by American Pig on Sat Nov 27 21:00:06 2004. Depends on the State. Some allow, some do not. |
|
|
| (4529) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 21:19:47 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by American Pig on Sat Nov 27 21:00:06 2004. Your comment is not relavent to the point that I was responding to. |
|
|
| (4530) | |
Re: Karl Rove |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Sat Nov 27 21:38:28 2004, in response to Re: Karl Rove, posted by Train Dude on Sat Nov 27 21:19:47 2004. Your response implied that registering ex-felons is wrong. It is not. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
|