Comments on: The Orwellian Worldview of Bush-haters–where Releasing Facts Means Having Something to Hide

By: alex

alex — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 20:24:29 +0000

this man kills our kids in a meaningless war and waste our hard earned money and on top of that he steals our freedom and our rights u poeple cant even be married in our countrys name because its gets him votes from old fag haters we cant even smoke weed wtf but we can drink and and send 18 year olds in a 3rd world country with bad training and bad armor they have to buy there own bullet proof vest for crying out loud so they can make more money off this whole thing its but yet he is a good man right we aint free here in canada and nietherlands those ppl are free not us we live only for corp. and u all let it happen even when ur being pushed around more then the rest of us pull ur heads out of ur rear and find the truth cuz the poor kid who went to iraq to support his family and died from a lack of armor cuz he sent money to his kids instead he knows the truth but his dead and its to late this is happening 28 more of them died today poor training and bad tactics are to blame on top of the fact that we shouldnt be there in the first place lets get realand lets not forget he says the world is fine and no need for corps to cut poluiton yea….. say that to the people alive 50 years from now and they will probly beat the shit out of u look around bush is destorying our world and our lifes dont be bind to this wake up for our future the world depends on us

By: homeland defense rifles

homeland defense rifles — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 08:55:17 +0000

We dont call them “assualt rifles” anymore. They are “homeland defense rifles” now

By: Grantham

Grantham — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:41:27 +0000

A New Low

It seems like every time the President tours America making anew the discredited case for justifying war in Iraq, the rhetoric-weary American people place him at all time lows. Maybe, just maybe, it’s because the American people are as smart…

By: raj

raj — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 22:29:14 +0000

ThatGayConservative — April 7, 2006 @ 9:30 pm – April 7, 2006

What? The Reinigung Frau is back?

Reinigung Frau? Was bedeutet das?

You really shouldn’t attempt to use a Fremdsprache, when you don’t understand it.

By: protein wisdom

protein wisdom — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:52:17 +0000

Push push in the Bush

James Taranto muses on the latest turn in the Plame affair. From WSJ's Best of the Web: If you'd told us earlier this week that the Valerie Plame kerfuffle was about to turn even sillier, we wouldn't have believed you. But it has. This s…

By: V the K

V the K — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:04:55 +0000

No reasonable person can read these excerpts from a Joe Wilson lecture and believe him to be anything other than a complete partisan hack and a Mega-a**hole: The Real Joe Wilson As for the wiretaps, it's easy to prove that they are both legal and prudent simply by pointing out that no Democrat in the Senate has moved to stop them. Instead, they are putting up a purely political censure motion.

By: blubi

blubi — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:48:42 +0000

Well, I admit that the President released classifed info for “political gain” – to refute Wilson´s lies, then again I remember the press demanding that the facts regarding the issue be made public. What´s Orwellian is that the facts are irrelevant: national security was not hurt by revealing that Valerie worked for the CIA, Wilson was not sent by the VP´s office, and the controversial 16 words are a not-so-well known fact.
If we want to stick to leaks, was Wilson´s trip to Niger unclassified? And who told him that the Niger document was a forgery?

By: Right Wing Nation » Blog Archive » Today’s Classic Quotation

Right Wing Nation » Blog Archive » Today’s Classic Quotation — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:07:37 +0000

[...] I rarely link to comments here, much less comments on other blogs, but this comment on Gay Patriot is too good to pass up: [...]

By: Calarato

Calarato — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 03:53:36 +0000

#46 – Because hank knows so much of Sullivan’s inner monologue, after all.

By: Tim

Tim — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 03:52:54 +0000

Listening to liberal complaints regarding national security is like asking a burger flipper for advice on neuro-surgery – both are profoundly unqualified, and their lack of experience and expertise at best is a waste of time and at worst life-threatening.

By: ThatGayConservative

ThatGayConservative — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 02:30:33 +0000

What? The Reinigung Frau is back?

By: hank

hank — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 01:07:54 +0000

“Sully both knows of me and despises me. Sweet.”

LOL

You flatter yourself.

By: GayPatriotWest

GayPatriotWest — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 22:34:17 +0000

OK, BN, I’ll take the bait. You say Bush Lied every time he responded to a question about the Plame case, please provide some examples. And explain how each constitutes a lie.

Despite an overzealous prosecutor, not one single charge on the underlying offense has yet been filed. And no one has yet shown that Mrs. Plame was a covert agent covered by the statute in question.

Those who claim BUSH LIED repeat their mantra as if it saying it so many times will make it so. Reminds me of the COWARDLY Lion in the Wizard of Oz. “I do believe in Spooks. I do believe in Spooks. I do, I do, I do, I do believe in Spooks.” But, believing in a fiction only makes it a truth in fairy tales and fantastic stories. Not in the real world.

I agree that there are many issues where the president deserves criticism. He has made a number of errors, but, he has not lied to the American people. And those who claim that he has have yet to provide any serious evidence to substantiate their accusation.

By: Duane

Duane — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:53:28 +0000

So you’re ok with a president so stupid that he didn’t bother declassifying the information when he could have, just so he could bypass all usual people who are supposed to be in the loop, to get back at Wilson and take the media’s minds off of the Wilson article?

Kind of amazing. Whenever I need to read a bunch of nonsense by people who have no idea how the security systems work, have never held a clearance, and have not even worked in a commercial company where they have proprietary information, I go look for a bunch of BDS loonies to be entertained.

Has anyone above ever seen a DD254? Who do you think sets the standards, and under what authority? Do you think that there is some enforcement officer at the WH making sure that the Prez follows all the standards? Under whose authority?

Let me give you an analogy. Microsoft has a secret project to develop “Doors2K8″. They meet every morning for update and coordination in the conference room outside Bill Gates’ door.

One day, because Google has announced that they are going into the market with their new web-based operating system, “O-Soogle”, Gates decides that he needs to short-circuit the publicity and reassure his customers that Windows will soon be upgradeable to a product that does everything O-Soogle is claiming and more. So he calls in his friend from Forbes and tells part of the Doors2K8 story.

Do you think that the marketing VP now has the power and right to have Gates punished because Bill released something identified in the Dooor2K8 marketing file as being confidential?

Good grief. Someone call Dr. Sanity, fast. A biunch of commenters here need her help.

By: Calarato

Calarato — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:50:05 +0000

I mean, “Bush lied(tm)” – about what exactly?

By: Calarato

Calarato — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:49:13 +0000

???????????????????????

How? Your comment makes no sense, BN.

By: BN

BN — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:45:52 +0000

You can spin till the cows come home, but the fact remains that Bush repeatedly lied to YOU every single time he responded to questions about the Plame case.

Admit it, you can’t forget those images, can you? You heard the words and now you KNOW he was lying through his teeth.

That’s gotta hurt…

By: Jeremy-Gilby-dot-com » Leaks or DeClassified?

Jeremy-Gilby-dot-com » Leaks or DeClassified? — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:51:20 +0000

[...] Now we witness the astonishing spectacle of newspapers trying to spin a scandal out of a legal disclosure of information to the press. GayPatriot aptly describes it as “the Orwellian worldview of Bush-haters where releasing facts means having something to hide.” Maybe we can’t expect better from political partisans, but journalists are supposed to stand for the neutral principle of the public’s right to know. If they pervert that principle in the pursuit of a partisan program, they will find it harder to assert it when it serves their purposes, whatever those purposes may be. [...]

By: Calarato

Calarato — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:42:32 +0000

#36 – V, yeah, that is sweet!

By: Pros and Cons » Breaking news make news seem broken!

Pros and Cons » Breaking news make news seem broken! — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:42:27 +0000

[...] In other words, James Taranto agrees with me. BY JAMES TARANTO – Friday, April 7, 2006 2:48 p.m. EDT Quick, Call a Plumber! If you’d told us earlier this week that the Valerie Plame kerfuffle was about to turn even sillier, we wouldn’t have believed you. But it has. This story appears on the front page of today’s New York Times: President Bush authorized Vice President Dick Cheney in July 2003 to permit Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr., to leak key portions of a classified prewar intelligence estimate on Iraq, according to Mr. Libby’s grand jury testimony. The testimony, cited in a court filing by the government late Wednesday, provides the first indication that Mr. Bush, who has long assailed leaks of classified information as a national security threat, played a direct role in the disclosure of the intelligence report on Iraq at a moment that the White House was trying to defend itself against charges that it had inflated the case against Saddam Hussein. Well, here is how the filing (PDF) by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald describes what happened (page 23): Defendant [Libby] testified that the Vice President later advised him that the President had authorized defendant to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE [National Intelligence Estimate]. Defendant testified that he also spoke to David Addington, then Counsel to the Vice President, whom defendant considered to be an expert in national security law, and Mr. Addington opined that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to a declassification of the document. In other words, this was an authorized disclosure of information, the opposite of a leak. Yet the Times, the Washington Post and even the New York Sun (albeit only in a headline) call it a “leak.” These reports have served as pornography for the Angry Left, which has constructed an elaborate fantasy world around the Plame kerfuffle. One reader shared with us his reverie about how this is actually a signal that Fitzgerald plans to indict Vice President Cheney. In fact, it is nothing more than a battle over procedure. Libby is seeking to compel the prosecution to turn over certain information to the defense; Fitzgerald is resisting. Among the information Fitzgerald has so far refused to turn over, by the way, are the two facts supposedly at the center of the case: whether Valerie Plame was a covert agent (extensive evidence on the public record comes close to proving that she was not), and who “leaked” Plame’s identity to columnist Bob Novak. More than anything else, the whole kerfuffle is a reflection on the way anti-Bush animus has fed into the adversarial culture of post-Watergate journalism in America. First the New York Times beat the drums for a special prosecutor to investigate who provided accurate information to reporters, albeit supposedly in violation of the law. Among the results: A Times reporter went to jail. Now we witness the astonishing spectacle of newspapers trying to spin a scandal out of a legal disclosure of information to the press. GayPatriot aptly describes it as “the Orwellian worldview of Bush-haters where releasing facts means having something to hide.” Maybe we can’t expect better from political partisans, but journalists are supposed to stand for the neutral principle of the public’s right to know. If they pervert that principle in the pursuit of a partisan program, they will find it harder to assert it when it serves their purposes, whatever those purposes may be. Lewis Libby and Libby Lewis We’re hoping some Angry Left paranoiac will develop a conspiracy theory out of this amusing coincidence: National Public Radio has a reporter named Libby Lewis covering the Lewis Libby story. John Robinson of the Greensboro, N.C., News-Record looked into it and assured us there’s no relation. But doesn’t it at least create the appearance of an interest of conflict? Shouldn’t Lewis’s NPR bosses encourage her to scoot over to another beat? [...]