Can you name this quote without Google?

JerryLove · 03-30-2010, 05:32 PM

Recently a politician (man in politics) was confronted by protestors voicing their outrage at policies he was involved in crafting (think "all those townhall meeting confrontations"). His response:

"They don't believe in dialogue. They don't believe in courtesy. They don't believe in First Amendment rights for anyone but themselves,"

**thesteve** · 03-30-2010, 06:04 PM

I think I just saw this on FB. This was a prominent member of the Bush Admin, correct?

Ax · 03-30-2010, 08:06 PM

Karl Rove. It'd have to be him or Glenn Beck to really drive home the irony.

Napoleon17 · 03-30-2010, 08:43 PM

I'm guessing McCain, Rove, or Cheney. Mostly Cheney.

Ax · 03-30-2010, 08:55 PM

Cheney hasn't been running his mouth as much lately... Karl Rove has that new book out.... That and he's a correspondent for Satan (fox) now.

JerryLove · 03-31-2010, 04:56 PM

It was Rove.

The thing is: I think he's right in saying "they don't believe in dialogue", but I think it's his side of the isle that has been hypocritical in their view on free speech.

Bush had his "free speech zones" to keep protestors away, and anti-war protesters were called unpatriotic while the people disrupting the town hall meetings were hailed and the tea-party and anti-UHC protesters were "patriots".

Almost Enough · 04-01-2010, 10:39 AM

Yeah, I heard that quote when I walked into my parents living room and Fox news was on.

I lol'd.

tlj009 · 04-01-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

It was Rove.

The thing is: I think he's right in saying "they don't believe in dialogue", but I think it's his side of the isle that has been hypocritical in their view on free speech.

Bush had his "free speech zones" to keep protestors away, and anti-war protesters were called unpatriotic while the people disrupting the town hall meetings were hailed and the tea-party and anti-UHC protesters were "patriots".

Both sides are hypocritical about it. Rove made that comment after some anti-war protesters disrupted his book signing. He used them to lump all of the "left" into the same category and made those comments about them. But that is really very little different than the left lumping all of the right in with any crazy person that they can find. And we have the same problems around here. We debate about how the man who crashed his plane into the IRS building did it because of his "right" tendencies. And we connect certain people in ACORN to the left. It is all ridiculous but it is not uncommon. And I don't think that we can harass Karl Rove about this without thinking about what we do our selves.

JerryLove · 04-01-2010, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlj009

Both sides are hypocritical about it. Rove made that comment after some anti-war protesters disrupted his book signing. He used them to lump all of the "left" into the same category and made those comments about them. But that is really very little different than the left lumping all of the right in with any crazy person that they can find.

It's not the stereotyping that set off my hypocracy meter: it's the fact that the right (and I honestly don't know if that includes Rove personally) supported the same behavior at town-hall meetings.

nolidad · 04-01-2010, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryLove

It's not the stereotyping that set off my hypocracy meter: it's the fact that the right (and I honestly don't know if that includes Rove personally) supported the same behavior at town-hall meetings.

Many folk at teh town hall meeting s did a lousy job at allowing th epoliticos to sayisomething in response to a comment.

When the left is in power- it is the right that is demonized
When the right is in power the left is demonized.

Welcome to real world politics American style.

Teh biggest difference about many oft he tea party folk is that trhey have been qiuet =ly just living and working and raising families and they have reached a boiling point. They are venting peacefully (but loudly). If this movement continues growing as it is doing- this Novembers elections weill be very interesting.

I recently met a candidate running against my Rep. Richie Neal-- He has a tea party philosophy and could very well win this year (my district has gone democartic for at least 46 years- before Neal it was Boland)

JerryLove · 04-01-2010, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolidad

Many folk at teh town hall meeting s did a lousy job at allowing th epoliticos to sayisomething in response to a comment.

When the left is in power- it is the right that is demonized
When the right is in power the left is demonized.

25% of Conservatives think Obama may be the anti-christ.

Who is demonized again?

nolidad · 04-02-2010, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryLove

25% of Conservatives think Obama may be the anti-christ.

Who is demonized again?

And when Bush was in office huge numbers wanted him tried as a war criminal. Once again when you get a president who is far left- He will draw alot of wrath from the right. When you have a president who is far right on issues like Bush was on some- you will draw the ire of the left.

I don't think Obama is the antichrist- at least not yet, He is nowhere close to fitting th eneeded reqwuirements of being mister 666.

JerryLove · 04-02-2010, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolidad

And when Bush was in office huge numbers wanted him tried as a war criminal. Once again when you get a president who is far left- He will draw alot of wrath from the right. When you have a president who is far right on issues like Bush was on some- you will draw the ire of the left.

I don't follow the logic. How does believeing a president who started a war on false pretense is a war criminal equate to believing someone is the anti-Christ?

Nevermind the obvious question of what percentage believed that.

nolidad · 04-02-2010, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryLove

I don't follow the logic. How does believeing a president who started a war on false pretense is a war criminal equate to believing someone is the anti-Christ?

Nevermind the obvious question of what percentage believed that.

Well see your phrasing is an indictment! Back at the time many believed it was not a false pretense. Even some of the darlings of the left-- Clinton, Kerry and REid voted for the war! 30 nations joined us and the fact that Hussein did what he did and defied many UN resolutions was all the right needed to take him down. But that is for another thread.
I do not know the pctge that considered him a war criminal.

But I remember when Bush pushed through his $600/taxpayer rebate and the dems going on national TV with a muffler in their hand and saying how cheap Bush was and that it would barely buy a muffler. Then those same folks swooning over the $420 reduction in withholding Obama approved (though he didn't reduce the tax burden on those people- they paid for it at teh end of the year) and saying how that was going to be a boon to the economy. I recognize the vitriol that comes from both sides- I toss it out as do you.

They equate because it springs from the same animosity . It is just dressed differently but it is the same kind of hatred.

I mean I can link to hundreds of sites showing all the Anti Bush vitriol that was spewed for 8 years up to Sen Kerry on the Bill Maher show saying he could go tothe White House and kill a bush there.

JerryLove · 04-02-2010, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolidad

Well see your phrasing is an indictment! Back at the time many believed it was not a false pretense. Even some of the darlings of the left-- Clinton, Kerry and REid voted for the war! 30 nations joined us and the fact that Hussein did what he did and defied many UN resolutions was all the right needed to take him down. But that is for another thread.

Well, they may have been pissed over the administration deciding to use 9/11 as an excuse for Iraq (as Rumsfield's letters on 9/12 establish he did), or his misrepresenting of intelligence (for example using the claim that Saddam was after fissile materials from Nigeria even though the source of that claim (an German informant) was discredited by the German government long before the paper got to his desk, and they pointed it out, and a simple vetting would have disproven it (the signatures were from the wrong people... people who were not in office at the same time). Or perhaps it was his use of torture, or suspension of habius corpus, or illegal wiretapping... I'm not sure. The point is: they had some foundation in reality that would preclude it from being a comparable case of "demonizing".

With a substatial portion of the conservitive population believing that Barak is, in fact, a demon however...

Quote:

But I remember when Bush pushed through his $600/taxpayer rebate and the dems going on national TV with a muffler in their hand and saying how cheap Bush was and that it would barely buy a muffler. Then those same folks swooning over the $420 reduction in withholding Obama approved (though he didn't reduce the tax burden on those people- they paid for it at teh end of the year) and saying how that was going to be a boon to the economy. I recognize the vitriol that comes from both sides- I toss it out as do you.

I don't see how either is "demonizing". You seem to be changing subjects.

Quote:

They equate because it springs from the same animosity . It is just dressed differently but it is the same kind of hatred.

I mean I can link to hundreds of sites showing all the Anti Bush vitriol that was spewed for 8 years up to Sen Kerry on the Bill Maher show saying he could go tothe White House and kill a bush there.

"This tax break isn't signifigant" is "hatred"?!?

Where is my 25% of liberals believing Bush to be the anti-christ?