"President Must Answer to Downing Street Memo"

wrote:
: On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:16:52 +0000 (UTC),
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:

: wrote:
: : On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:06:46 +0000 (UTC),
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote:
:
: :
: : You conservatives have control of all three branches of the governement
: : and simply can't handle it. The worst part is crap like you posted above.
: : You go away! I'm staying!
: :
:
: : Nothing like laughing at the antics of liberal/socialist
: : losers. They are darn right funny when they
: : are outta power.
:
: Laughing?
: Yep, laughing at you liberal/socialist morons....
: Tell you what, if you win some 'Major" elections, get back to us.
: Till then, it's nothing but hot air and monkey chatter coming from
: the liberal losers like you.

You know nothing about me. You don't use your real name and actually
define yourself by those you oppose. YOU, dirtbag, are the loser! The fact
that the country elects marginal leaders makes us ALL losers.

Democrats are more critical of their own and others, Republicans stand by
their own despite how lousy their candidates are. THAT is the diffference
and why Republicans are "winning'elections these days. If your side is
made up of such winners then how come the country isn't in better shape?

: Also, if Rove mentioned the CIA agent but didn't give Novak her name,
: then how did Novak know her name? If Rove isn't going down, then someone
: else is.
: Everybody knew her name.
: And just to help you out, she wasn't on the payroll as a
: bonifide, outta the county, secret agent type.

So he didn't break a law. Why did Rove mention her at all? Why bring her
up name or no name? What was the purpose in doing so?

: Looks like you been watching too many episodes of "Alias."
: Next time, fire up the two active braincells you have and get
: the facts before you look even more stupid.
: Got it?

Pretty bold for someone that doesn't use their real name. Cowards like you
really aren't worth debating. And if you intend to get into a battle of
wits with me, then you better come better than half prepared!

: And post your nonsense elsewhere besides in newsgroups
: dealing with space, idiot.....

I didn't start this thread and I'm not the only one that is off topic. You
don't like it then don't post, otherwise you had better get on your
asbestos suit because you are about to get flamed!

Eric

wrote:
: On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:57:30 +0000 (UTC),
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:

: Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: : On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:16:51 GMT, in a place far, far away,
: : h (Rand Simberg) made the phosphor on my
: : monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:
:
: : People should be asking why Judith Miller remains in jail. It can't
: : be to protect Karl Rove, because he's already been outed by Newsweek,
:
: : Sorry, that should have been Time. I don't read either publication
: : regularly, but they seem so similar to me I tend to get them confused.
:
: The fact that you are confused is true...
: The fact that you are nothing but a bitter little liberal dweeb of
: a loser is true.
: Run along and ponder that piece of reality.

You wouldn't know reality if it bit you on the ass!

wrote:
: On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:03:42 +0000 (UTC),
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:

: Scott M. Kozel ) wrote:
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote:
: :
: : wrote:
: : : (Eric Chomko) wrote:
: :
: : : You conservatives have control of all three branches of the governement
: : : and simply can't handle it. The worst part is crap like you posted above.
: : : You go away! I'm staying!
: :
: : : Nothing like laughing at the antics of liberal/socialist
: : : losers. They are darn right funny when they
: : : are outta power.
: :
: : Laughing? Right, just like right before the Great Depression, McCarthyism
: : and Watergate, the three biggest debacles by the GOP in the 20th Century.
: : It is another generation and the Republicans are ready for another
: : screwup. Perhaps Iraq? Looks like more are getting killed there everyday.
:
: : Actually, the Dems are in the process of their biggest debacle as they
: : melt down and make a power dive leading to a smoking hole in the ground.
:
: By the time W is out of office any Dem will be able to beat any Rep for
: president. People will simply be tired of them. He really hasn't done
: anything in his second term. NOTHING!
:

: What time would the sun rise in your little fantasy world?

Same time as yours...

Scott M. Kozel ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:
:
: Scott M. Kozel ) wrote:
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote:
: : Scott M. Kozel ) wrote:
: : : (Eric Chomko) wrote:
: : : wrote:
: : : : (Eric Chomko) wrote:
: : :
: : : : You conservatives have control of all three branches of the governement
: : : : and simply can't handle it. The worst part is crap like you posted above.
: : : : You go away! I'm staying!
: : :
: : : : Nothing like laughing at the antics of liberal/socialist
: : : : losers. They are darn right funny when they
: : : : are outta power.
: : :
: : : Laughing? Right, just like right before the Great Depression, McCarthyism
: : : and Watergate, the three biggest debacles by the GOP in the 20th Century.
: : : It is another generation and the Republicans are ready for another
: : : screwup. Perhaps Iraq? Looks like more are getting killed there everyday.
: :
: : : Actually, the Dems are in the process of their biggest debacle as they
: : : melt down and make a power dive leading to a smoking hole in the ground.
: :
: : By the time W is out of office any Dem will be able to beat any Rep for
: : president. People will simply be tired of them. He really hasn't done
: : anything in his second term. NOTHING!
:
: : Pure fantasy. The Dems continue to lose elections, and they dig their
: : hole deeper day by day.
:
: Hole deeper? Just like the success of the mixing bowl down in Springfield,
: VA, Scott? You have anything to do with that mess? hahahaha
:
: The Reps are due for another debacle like Watergate.

: The Dems are in the midst of a debacle deeper than Watergate.
: They have lost all the handles of power, and they continue to sink.

Yet right now they have Rove in their sights, will probably get at least
one non conservative on the SC when OConner and Rehnquist leave and stand
to gain several seats in Congress due to the fact that the GOPers are
fight amoungst themselves as that is all they know how to do. Actually,
the Dems have the Reps right where they want them...

Eric

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 15:56:16 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
: (Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
: monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: : Getting killed but not at war. More like what is happening in Israel
: : (today) and London last week. War is one thing, road side bombings and the
: : like is quite another.
:
: : No, it's a war, in all three places.
:
: No it isn't!

: Exclamation marks don't make false statements true.

Right and lack of them don't make it false either.

: : If it is such a simple matter to find out the identity of a CIA agent,
: : then why does the governemnt go out of its way to hide their identities?
:
: : She wasn't a CIA agent. She was a desk analyst. She was not covert.
: : She drove to Langley every day in her BMW.
:
: Okay, then why did someone (Rove?) mention her name at all?

: Rove didn't mention her name. He apparently didn't even know her
: name.

Why bring her up? If not by name, then by person. Why bring her up?

: What purpose
: did mentioning her name actually serve? Why did Novak then mention her
: name?

: To explain the stupidity of sending her husband to Niger, and that it
: wasn't done at Cheney's behest, which was one of the many things that
: Wilson lied (or was deluded) about..

So Valerie Plume sent her husband to Niger?! This is new! And Rove wanted
to set the record straight by making sure that Cheney wasn't implicated?

: : Rove broke no laws, as the law is written.
:
: Only because she wasn't working overseas.

: No, there are many conditions necessary for the law to be broken, none
: of which apply.

: THAT is the only reason he
: didn't break the law! Forget the law, what he did was immoral and
: poltically driven.

: No, he was simply whistelblowing on rogue CIA people, and trying to
: keep Time from running a false story.

So now "rogue CIA people" are the ones that won't lie for the White House?
Yes, THAT is what Rove, Cheney and Bush think!

: rest of stupid statements and questions snipped

Translation: Rand is both too ignorant and lazy to deal with the
statements, so he pompously labels them "stupid". If you had half the
talent that you think you do, then you could be president. Wait, a guy as
dumb as you is already there! Perhaps that's why you like him? hahahahaha

Eric

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 20:08:49 -0500, in a place far, far away, Pat
: Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
: such a way as to indicate that:

:
:
: Howie Dean@liberal losers.com wrote:
:
: The fact that you are nothing but a bitter little liberal dweeb of
: a loser is true.
: Run along and ponder that piece of reality.
:
:
:
: Rand's a liberal? Excuse me while I faint. :-D

: Well, I am a classical liberal, but I'm pretty sure that he wasn't
: referring to me.

Classical gassssss....

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:25:51 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: : By the time W is out of office any Dem will be able to beat any Rep for
: : president. People will simply be tired of them. He really hasn't done
: : anything in his second term. NOTHING!
:
: : Pure fantasy. The Dems continue to lose elections, and they dig their
: : hole deeper day by day.
:
: Hole deeper? Just like the success of the mixing bowl down in Springfield,
: VA, Scott? You have anything to do with that mess? hahahaha
:
: The Reps are due for another debacle like Watergate.

: The Dems are in the midst of a debacle deeper than Watergate.
: They have lost all the handles of power, and they continue to sink.

Yet right now they have Rove in their sights, will probably get at least
one non conservative on the SC when OConner and Rehnquist leave and stand
to gain several seats in Congress due to the fact that the GOPers are
fight amoungst themselves as that is all they know how to do. Actually,
the Dems have the Reps right where they want them...

Eric, come on. Admit it.

Rove pays you to post this stuff, right?

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:35:49 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: Okay, then why did someone (Rove?) mention her name at all?

: Rove didn't mention her name. He apparently didn't even know her
: name.

Why bring her up? If not by name, then by person. Why bring her up?

Eric, this has been explained to you many times, but I did it once
again, below, since you seem to have such a short attention span.

: What purpose
: did mentioning her name actually serve? Why did Novak then mention her
: name?

: To explain the stupidity of sending her husband to Niger, and that it
: wasn't done at Cheney's behest, which was one of the many things that
: Wilson lied (or was deluded) about..

So Valerie Plume sent her husband to Niger?!

She recommended it. It certainly wouldn't have happened if she
hadn't.

This is new!

Only to people who have been paying no attention to anything except
DNC talking points. It's actually very old news.

And Rove wanted
to set the record straight by making sure that Cheney wasn't implicated?

Yes. He may have also wanted to do the reporter a favor, helping him
to not make a fool of himself, by keeping Time from putting out yet
another mistaken story that would damage their own credibility, but
that's less clear.

: THAT is the only reason he
: didn't break the law! Forget the law, what he did was immoral and
: poltically driven.

: No, he was simply whistelblowing on rogue CIA people, and trying to
: keep Time from running a false story.

So now "rogue CIA people" are the ones that won't lie for the White House?

It had nothing to do with "lying for the White House." It was about
lying about the administration, and about uranium in Africa. Wilson's
tales mystically changed between the time that he was blabbing to the
press about how he found nothing in Niger, and when he actually had to
testify under oath. He couldn't have been telling the truth on both
occasions..

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:25:51 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
: (Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
: monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: : : By the time W is out of office any Dem will be able to beat any Rep for
: : : president. People will simply be tired of them. He really hasn't done
: : : anything in his second term. NOTHING!
: :
: : : Pure fantasy. The Dems continue to lose elections, and they dig their
: : : hole deeper day by day.
: :
: : Hole deeper? Just like the success of the mixing bowl down in Springfield,
: : VA, Scott? You have anything to do with that mess? hahahaha
: :
: : The Reps are due for another debacle like Watergate.
:
: : The Dems are in the midst of a debacle deeper than Watergate.
: : They have lost all the handles of power, and they continue to sink.
:
: Yet right now they have Rove in their sights, will probably get at least
: one non conservative on the SC when OConner and Rehnquist leave and stand
: to gain several seats in Congress due to the fact that the GOPers are
: fight amoungst themselves as that is all they know how to do. Actually,
: the Dems have the Reps right where they want them...

: Eric, come on. Admit it.

Okay, you're a twit.

: Rove pays you to post this stuff, right?

Rove won't be able to pay anyone other than lawyers for awhile the way I
see it.

Eric

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:35:49 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
: (Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
: monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: : Okay, then why did someone (Rove?) mention her name at all?
:
: : Rove didn't mention her name. He apparently didn't even know her
: : name.
:
: Why bring her up? If not by name, then by person. Why bring her up?

: Eric, this has been explained to you many times, but I did it once
: again, below, since you seem to have such a short attention span.

: : What purpose
: : did mentioning her name actually serve? Why did Novak then mention her
: : name?
:
: : To explain the stupidity of sending her husband to Niger, and that it
: : wasn't done at Cheney's behest, which was one of the many things that
: : Wilson lied (or was deluded) about..
:
: So Valerie Plume sent her husband to Niger?!

: She recommended it. It certainly wouldn't have happened if she
: hadn't.

Why?

: This is new!

: Only to people who have been paying no attention to anything except
: DNC talking points. It's actually very old news.

Old news yet RIGHT NOW Rove's butt is in the fire about something that
happened 2 years ago! THOSE sort of things stick!

So when you mention this Plame thing WRT Rove time doesn't much matter.

: And Rove wanted
: to set the record straight by making sure that Cheney wasn't implicated?

: Yes. He may have also wanted to do the reporter a favor, helping him
: to not make a fool of himself, by keeping Time from putting out yet
: another mistaken story that would damage their own credibility, but
: that's less clear.

Rand, the point of the whole thing is that Bush and Co. wanted to invade
Iraq. They came up with Saddam wanting WMD. Somehow, which still isn't
clear, the aspect of Saddam wanting urainium from Niger came up. This
never proved to be true, and Wilson and his wife KNEW that. That didn't
stop Bush and Co. When it was clear that Bush and Co. were either mistaken
or trying to push and out and out lie and were called on it by Plame and
Wilson, THEN did Rove, Bush's lackey, go out of his way to make an example
of Wilson by outting his wife, Plame. Perhaps its the old Deocrats against
the Republicans as usual. But using the tactic of trying to hurt your
opponent by outting them? If the Dems did that the Reps would be calling
for the friggin chair, as they somehow feel that their love of country and
awareness of national security is inherently superior! Somehow I'm
supposed to think Rove is okay because he broke no law, and that just
because Plame wasn't working overseas. His intent, Rand, is simply bad! He
screwed up and should have to pay!

: : THAT is the only reason he
: : didn't break the law! Forget the law, what he did was immoral and
: : poltically driven.
:
: : No, he was simply whistelblowing on rogue CIA people, and trying to
: : keep Time from running a false story.
:
: So now "rogue CIA people" are the ones that won't lie for the White House?

: It had nothing to do with "lying for the White House."

It had EVERYTHING to do with lying for the White House! Isn't "White
House" and the "Bush administration" the same thing?!

: It was about
: lying about the administration, and about uranium in Africa. Wilson's
: tales mystically changed between the time that he was blabbing to the
: press about how he found nothing in Niger, and when he actually had to
: testify under oath. He couldn't have been telling the truth on both
: occasions..

The only person that lied under oath is Rove.

Eric