In his new book Rove makes an accidental admission of the reaction of Bush on lies by his advisors.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Rove's Inadvertent Admission: Bush Wasn't Angry About Rove's Lie
- Thread starter Crabtownboy
- Start date
Trotter
<img src =/6412.jpg>
Why, DubYa should have sprouted horns and a barbed tail and ordered Rove's execution right then and there, and then jumped across the desk and snatched the pistol from the Secret Service guys and killed Rove himself.
Or so they try to make it sound.
I would rather the CiC be able to control himself and think clearly. That's one thing W seemed to be able to do consistently.
I would rather the CiC be able to control himself and think clearly. That's one thing W seemed to be able to do consistently.
Without a teleprompter, yet!:smilewinkgrin:
Then from the article you quoted:
Was it an accident or not Crabby? If he purposely wrote a book showing that the President didn't care, then how is it an accident?
An oversight by both Rove and his editor on what he was admitting, that he lied and Bush did not care that he lied and even allowed it, the lie, to be put in a public record even though he, Bush, knew it was not true. People make mistakes and I believe Rove made one in his book. The reviewer of the book used the word "inadvertent" admission.
Now you are the one who is lying.
The article says, "Bush sounded a little annoyed."
It does not say "did not care".
Please stop lying.
ROFL ... when you know you are on the loosing side or the wrong side start the negatives. You are good at that.
If Bush had cared he would have done something. He did nothing though he had promised otherwise, in public.
Loosing side of what?
I did not work at the White House and I have had no personal contact with either George Bush or Carl Rove.
I simply believe that it is wrong to use a lie to call another a liar.
How do you know that Bush did not do something?
Just because it is not mentioned in your little article?
Do you have personal sources that know George Bush's every thought and action?
And why do you not man up to your lie?
How many lies are acceptable to you?
Last edited by a moderator:
Magnetic Poles
New Member
Surely you jest. CLICK HEREI would rather the CiC be able to control himself and think clearly. That's one thing W seemed to be able to do consistently.
Such silly questions concerning a hopeless cause. His record is public. Got look it up. It is there.
Was Rove fired?
Was Rove reprimanded?
Was Rove's lie ever acknowledged and apologized for?
Did Bush allow his press secretary to continue the lie?
You said that Bush did not "do something".
Those things that you listed are not the only "somethings" that Bush could have done.
The "something" that Bush may have done may not necessarily be information that you are aware of.
Why do you not repent of your lie?
Here's your problem, Crabby.
You are taking the opinion of another person on one line that other person selectively picked from a book that you have not yourself read.
That may or may not be all that Rove wrote about that particular topic in his book.
And even if it is - you do not know if Rove included in his book every single conversation that Bush had with Rove about it.
You do not know the mind of George Bush concerning this topic.
You do not know what George Bush said to other persons about this matter.
You have nothing other than your ususal liberal, self important, and self imagined moral superiority.
But even that facade is shattered with YOUR lie on this very board in this very thread.
You are taking the opinion of another person on one line that other person selectively picked from a book that you have not yourself read.
That may or may not be all that Rove wrote about that particular topic in his book.
And even if it is - you do not know if Rove included in his book every single conversation that Bush had with Rove about it.
You do not know the mind of George Bush concerning this topic.
You do not know what George Bush said to other persons about this matter.
You have nothing other than your ususal liberal, self important, and self imagined moral superiority.
But even that facade is shattered with YOUR lie on this very board in this very thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
Come on, folks:
It's OK for CTB to play fast and loose with the truth...he must do so to help us stupid, narrow-minded cretins along in our evolution to enlightened thought. Maybe, if we progress far enough, he can talk to us like grown-ups.
I bet it's hard putting up with stupid, backward, "right-wingers," isn't it, CTB? Bless your heart, you probably have to de-louse after even conversing with any of us on the BB.
Thank you for being so understanding. Maybe one day, when I'm smart like you, I can properly convey my gratitude. But I might need your help in typing the thank-you note, because big words scare me.
What you will find me doing is pointing out that you are as intellectually dishonest as any BB poster...because unlike what I just did, you will not admit that leftist, statist, freedom-averse politicians (with whom you carry on an extended infatuation) ever do wrong. But you will find any and every excuse (whether real or contrived) to bash Republicans, or more broadly, conservatives (and no, those are not synonymous). I'm willing to criticize folks from the party that comes closer to espousing my views. You aren't.
And, predictably, when you are confronted, all we hear are crickets chirping--because you bail on any thread where you don't have the "upper hand." And for those keeping score, you've been bailing quite a bit lately.
It's OK for CTB to play fast and loose with the truth...he must do so to help us stupid, narrow-minded cretins along in our evolution to enlightened thought. Maybe, if we progress far enough, he can talk to us like grown-ups.
I bet it's hard putting up with stupid, backward, "right-wingers," isn't it, CTB? Bless your heart, you probably have to de-louse after even conversing with any of us on the BB.
Thank you for being so understanding. Maybe one day, when I'm smart like you, I can properly convey my gratitude. But I might need your help in typing the thank-you note, because big words scare me.
- You are aware, aren't you, that many of us here weren't big fans of Bush?
- You are aware, aren't you, that many of us voted for Bush only to keep moonbat Gore out of office (and only one mired in abject stupidity could envision Gore's presidency as being anything close to successful)?
- You are aware, aren't you, that many of us voted for Bush only to keep Lurch out of office (and for that, you can likely thank us...that 9/11 version 2.0, 3.0 and beyond hasn't happened)?
What you will find me doing is pointing out that you are as intellectually dishonest as any BB poster...because unlike what I just did, you will not admit that leftist, statist, freedom-averse politicians (with whom you carry on an extended infatuation) ever do wrong. But you will find any and every excuse (whether real or contrived) to bash Republicans, or more broadly, conservatives (and no, those are not synonymous). I'm willing to criticize folks from the party that comes closer to espousing my views. You aren't.
And, predictably, when you are confronted, all we hear are crickets chirping--because you bail on any thread where you don't have the "upper hand." And for those keeping score, you've been bailing quite a bit lately.
Last edited by a moderator:
Is your comprehension of the written word really that poor?
Or are you just stubborn?
I clearly said that Bush and Rove may have had other conversations about the matter that are not included in the single sentence that your source is aware of.
To not include every single word that Bush and Rove exchanged in the books does not mean that Rove is not telling the truth about that particular exchange.
BTW - the words "that's it" belong to the author of your OP opinion peice - not Rove.
And as I already said - you are not privy to all the actions of the parties.
That is an incorrect guess that I will attribute to your poor reading comprehension.
This appears to be a backhanded admission that this thread of yours is "very wild".
We may be making progress.
Your questions were answered - again I will attribute your lack of satisfaction to poor reading comprehension.
Last edited by a moderator:
Perhaps because it was not intended as a complete and exhaustive word for word - minute by minute - all inclusive record of all eight years of the Bush Whitehouse.
You are assuming that the only conversation between Rove and Bush or Bush and anyone else about the matter is contained in the book - or more accurately in that single sentence.
Very bad logic.
Really? Rove said that Bush "did nothing about it"?
Hint - that is not what Rove said in that single sentence that was cited in the OP.
Be careful you are straying from the truth again.
Firing and a public admission are not the only two options.
But we have already been over this - well at least one of us has. :laugh:
Yes, I am.
I find it interesting that you are excusing yourself from the truth by your inference that others may not be truthful when it comes to Obama.
Do you find lying to be acceptable?
CTB's approach is such: People on the "enlightened" side cannot be wrong.
He has to believe this...otherwise, you would find him at some point critical of Obama and his minions.
But, strangely enough, you never seem to see his criticism of the Chosen One.
Double standard, anyone? Intellectual dishonesty, anyone?
I think that Crabby has a "get Bush" obsession and that he is genuinely surprised when thinks that he has a really good "Bush gotcha" and someone actually disagrees with him.
He has no response to objections because it never occurred to him that he would ever need one.