The Karl Rove Story: Are Liberals and Their MSM Congenital Liars or Just Morons? (Great!)

"Karl Rove did no wrong. There was no “malicious attempt to smear Wilson” nor was there any counter campaign against Wilson, other than Rove’s warning to Matt Cooper that Wilson was way off base when he implied that he had been sent to Niger at Dick Cheney’s request."

I’m beginning to agree with Michael Savage, that Liberalism is a Mental Disease. Today the MSM is engaged in a concerted effort to destroy Karl Rove and George Bush by deliberately lying about what President Bush said about the Rove Investigation and how the President will act after the investigation concludes. They persist in saying that Presidents standards for Rove’s dismissal have changed, even though Bush has been absolutely consistent. Here are the two statements President Bush made back to back, exactly as they were made in response to questions from the press:

George Bush on September 30th, 2003: "If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And uh if the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of."

George Bush on July 18, 2005: "We have a serious ongoing investigation here, and it's being played out in the press, and I think it's best people wait until the investigation is complete before you jump to conclusions. I will do so as well. I don't know all the facts. I want to know all the facts. The best place for the facts to be done is by somebody who is spending time investigating it. I would like this to end as quickly as possible. So we know the facts. And if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my Administration.”

Now to me and any honest reader of these two statements the only possible conclusion is that President Bush has been scrupulously consistent in what he has said. I ask you, what part of the above statements is in any way ambiguous? You liberals tell me, please. Am I missing something here? Yeah, I thought not.

Okay, having established that President Bush has not changed his stand on how to handle “the Rove Scandal” since the first question asked about it, let’s examine exactly how the “non-biased” Main Stream Media portrays this inflexible, unchanged stance:

Chicago Tribune today, Mark Silva headline says “Bush limits conditions on firing aides in CIA leak”...LIAR!!!

Newsday today, Craig Gordon headline says “Bush changes his firing line. He now says a leaker must have broken the law before he would let him go, a supportive sign for aide Karl Rove”...LIAR!!!

Washington Post today, Dan Froomkin headline says: “A Sidestep and a Backtrack”...LIAR!!!

San Francisco Chronicle today, Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen of the Washington Post headline says, “Bush alters standard for firing in leak case. President says an aide would have had to commit a crime, not just be involved”...LIARS!!!

International Herald Tribune-France today, David Stout of The New York Times “Bush shifts standard for firings in scandal”...LIAR!!!

Minneapolis Star Tribune today, David E. Sanger and Richard W. Stevenson of the New York Times headline says: “CIA leak: Bush seems to raise bar for firing”...LIARS!!!

Finally from CNN.com, this headline: President Bush appeared to backtrack Monday from his 2004 pledge to fire anyone involved in leaking the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame...(need I say it, yes) LIARS!!!

I could go on virtually indefinitely with these quotes, variations on a theme. The theme? I was thinking maybe “Liar” by Three Dog Night. Now all you Liberals tell me once again that there’s no Left-wing bias in the MSM.

The key to this puzzling conundrum is two-fold. First is the motive of the MSM to hang Karl Rove and by implication George Bush. They then combine this motive with the answer President Bush gave to a poorly (or cleverly) worded question asked by an unidentified reporter. The “unbiased media” are basing their claim of an alleged change of stance on the following conversation between a reporter and President Bush on June 10th 2004. “Do you stand by your previous pledge to fire anybody who leaked her name?” President Bush: “Yes, and that’s up to the U.S. attorney to determine the facts.”

For this to be construed to be a change of stance, they have to twist the meaning of President Bush’s answer to that contrived and erroneous question. President Bush is standing by his previous pledge as stated on September 30th, 2003. That pledge was not “to fire anybody who leaked her name,” it was to fire them if they broke the law (committed a crime, for you Liberals).

The only conclusion you can draw from this, is that the MSM is engaged in an unconscionable, intentional, ruthless, deceptive, politically motivated, campaign to destroy Karl Rove and President George Bush through lies and distortions. Clearly this makes them fall into the category of congenital liars.

Democrats on the other hand are falling for this tripe hook, line, and sinker. A quick visit to any of the Left-wing blog sites will give you a good glimpse into the simple minds of the blind followers of the Big Corporate Electronic and Print Media Monolith of the Left. The denizens of those blogs like dailyKos and BoomanTribune live in a complete fantasy world (and I know I’ve said this before) in which they only see what they want to see. They never see what is actually written on the page, unless it suits their purposes.

I have become firmly convinced, that many of them are incapable of reading (not unexpected given the condition to which the Liberals have reduced our education system), or at the very least, incapable of comprehending what they read. Thus they go by whatever they are told by their Liberal friends in the MSM and on the blogs. Because they hate conservatives so much, they rarely associate with them and even when they do, they don’t hear what the conservative is saying because they are so sure the it’s wrong, and they are too busy trying to figure out how to respond when that conservative hits them with the facts.

Hence, they never get but one side of the discussion, so they exist in a complete self-confirming bubble of ignorance and hatred. For them, I guess, ignorance truly is bliss. Perhaps “morons” is a bit strong, but sometimes strong language is the only way to get them to hear what is being said.

As for the “unbiased” MSM you can take all of those headlines, shuffle them and put them in any spot, and there would be no effective difference. This is a unified monolithic group effort to smear and destroy a Presidency. If the Republicans had gotten this much help from the media when Clinton lied to the Grand Jury, he would be wearing orange coveralls today and Hillary would probably be in the next cell.

Ah, but the press didn’t care about Sandy Berger and all those classified files with which he absconded. They didn’t care about the FBI files that Hillary had stashed up there in the White House. They couldn’t have cared less about Clinton’s habitual sexual abuse of the women around him, even when he had been accused, quite credibly, of rape. That was because Billy boy was their President. As with the cozy relationship they had with JFK, they chose to turn a blind eye on everything concerning his misbehavior they could. It was only when the MSM was confronted with Monica’s stained dress and the tapes that Linda Tripp made that they grudgingly turned their attention to investigating Clinton. Even then, they couldn’t control their natural impulse to attack Clinton’s critics.

They demonized Linda Tripp in the cruelest and basest way and once Clinton was found not guilty by the Senate, they dropped the story like a hot rock and went on vilifying Linda Tripp and any one else who criticized the Clintons.

Karl Rove did no wrong. There was no “malicious attempt to smear Wilson” nor was there any counter campaign against Wilson, other than Rove’s warning to Matt Cooper that Wilson was way off base when he implied that he had been sent to Niger at Dick Cheney’s request. Wilson himself had nothing to say about this whole matter until a week or two after joining the Kerry campaign as an advisor.

Then all of the sudden, he decided to write his now thoroughly debunked editorial in the NYT. The press and the Dimocrats are now hanging all of their hopes on l’Affaire Plame-Wilson. The funny thing is that no matter how much proof they are shown by conservatives, the true believers among the Liberals will never believe it. So certain are they of their own rectitude that they are walking willingly-blindly-off a cliff and when any of their conservative friends try to warn them of their folly, they happily sing the refrain of “methinks he doeth protest too much,” refusing to believe anything except that conservatives-Republicans-are getting desperate in their attempt to save a “doomed President.”.

As they are reading this, I guarantee you they are thinking that very thought. They will not see the truth in these words; instead they will read them with contempt. In fact, it is doubtful they will get this far down before they stop reading because deep thought gives them headaches (okay, maybe I made that part up). In their unwavering faith lie the seeds of another Republican victory.

The arrogance of the Left is the source of their ever-deepening downfall. For them, as a conservative, I cannot possibly be correct because I am too ignorant to understand how errant my view of the world is. I am to them “a mind-numb robot” as Rush Limbaugh likes to say, and can only barely walk and talk.

There is no fool like one who believes his own propaganda. I tell you it just gets funnier and funnier.

Most people are smarter than the press believes.
Anyone who has read the facts in the Rove case, even as the press attempts to form an opinion, can see that the only real "outing" is that the press has an agenda against the Republican Party and the President.
As they read the lies, they rally around the victim and the press becomes the enemy.
The irrational anger of the Democratic Party has led to their undoing. They have hit bottom and the press is digging in an effort to lift them out.
Everything that goes around, comes around. In the newspaper business, that's known as circulation.

For relevance on Wilson as Leaker-liar see the post on David Corn's use of Wilson as first Plame-CIA source, David HOroqitz Column on Plame as one deerving herself of being Grand Jury target, and my post on Wlson as inferential leaker, crass braggart, and blabbermouth re: his wife's CIA status:

Was the Narcissistic Joe Wilson a Source in "Outing" His Own Wife Valerie Plame as a "CIA Agent"?

The Karl Rove Story: Are Liberals and Their MSM Congenital Liars or Just Morons? (Great!)
MENS NEWS DAILY.COM ^ | JULY 19, 2005 | LEE MALVEN
Posted on 07/19/2005 11:14:04 PM EDT by CHARLITE
"Karl Rove did no wrong. There was no “malicious attempt to smear Wilson” nor was there any counter campaign against Wilson, other than Rove’s warning to Matt Cooper that Wilson was way off base when he implied that he had been sent to Niger at Dick Cheney’s request."

Leftists are congenital liars and self-deceivers. They just prove to be moronic BRATS in their futile attempts at dirty, obstructive underhanded tactics. Because of instant news exposure, reaction and rebuttal through World Wide NET communications, deceptive Demobrat' ploys of slander, misrepresentation and distraction can no longer take root as they once did when sowed by the enabling establishment MEDIA. Deceitful Dan Rather/CBS was filleted, flattened and deflated within 24 hours. (by the Forever Immortalized Free Republic!)

The truth is...

And CHEERS for Char : ) Instant reporting!

"Deceitful Dan Rather/CBS was filleted, flattened and deflated within 24 hours. (by the Forever Immortalized Free Republic!)"

,,,,,,and my profound apologies to Will Malven! For some totally inexplicable reason, I gave Will the new first name of "Lee."

So sorry, Will! It won't happen again! Your work is wonderful, and I always keep an eye out for new pieces!

Char :)

"They're Evil because their very being depends upon holding coercive political POWER (or closely-related dominant media power) over the rest of us. They cannot often earn livings outside of politics and the MSM echo-chamber & self-reinforcing academic-talking head parallel reality world."

Excellent assessment!

Expose them for what they are: congenitally politik parasites! Foppish duplicitous courtiers! Deranged and hystrionic demagogues! Career politicians like Extreme Dean, soppy Durbin, fetid Kennedy, UNFIT Kerry and Begala!
These peevish self-interested humbugs are a disgrace to America. May I ask what is the essential psychological difference in respective hate speeches made by demonic Democrats and fanatical mullahs?

Does the Democrats' pathological hatred manifested toward Bush and Republicans compare to fanatical Islamics' justifying their terrorist "Jihad"?

"I think Michael Savage is basically correct."
["liberalism" is a mental disease.]

Excerpt from esssay on The psychology Underlying "Liberalism", by Dr. John J. Ray, http://jonjayray.netfirms.com

Whether Leftist and Rightist objectives are opposite or just simply different, how Leftists and Rightists go about achieving their different basic objectives certainly generates plenty of conflict and opposition between the two sides.

My basic proposal, then, is that most (but not all) Leftists/liberals are motivated by strong ego needs -- needs for power, attention, praise and fame. And in the USA and other developed countries they satisfy this need by advocating large changes in the society around them -- thus drawing attention to themselves and hopefully causing themselves to be seen as wise, innovative, caring etc. Rightists by contrast have no need either for change or its opposite and may oppose change if they see it as destructive or favour change if they see it as constructive.

We will see below why one of the most consistent themes to emerge from the Leftist's love of change is the claimed need for "equality". And the belief in "equality" also tends to lead to support for such things as redistribution of wealth generally, heavily "progressive" income taxes, inheritance taxes, foreign aid, feminism, gay rights and socialized medicine. Again for reasons explored below, Leftists also tend to oppose religion and the churches and this in turn tends to mean that they favour abortion and oppose or obstruct religious schooling in various ways. So let us now briefly look at some of these characteristic Leftist/liberal themes to see how they relate to basic Leftist motives.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.