What is a definition of "neo-conservativism"?

If someone committed a felony regarding the Novak "Outing" then somebody needs to be charged with the crime.

Don't blame Bob Novak for sins committed either in the CIA or at the WH.

 

You're right. Bush's reaction should have been. "We need to find this creep and put him away. Instead, he got a lawyer. So much for cooperation. Unless someone in the WH cracks, the traitor will probably not be charged.

Well, I don't think much of Novak's loyalty to America, either. He knew what he was doing to the CIA when he wrote the column. But technically, he isn't the one who committed the crime.

 

I cannot believe that you would actually post this.

Perhaps you are unaware of Mr. Wilson's background. Next time research him before you make such a statement. As a matter of fact, read what Novak said about him in this article - specifically the fifth paragraph.

Secondly, how have you ascertained that she was "the one who suggested her husband for the job?" If you read the article, not even Novak has made this claim. He merely said that "two senior administration officials" told him that it was she who suggested that Wilson be sent to Africa. He also notes that the CIA said that its "counter-proliferation officials" selected Joe Wilson.

Thirdly, the intelligence was bogus. Everyone knows this.

Lastly, NOTHING you offer in this reply changes the simple fact that, in his article dated July 14, 2004, Novak "outed" a CIA operative. That is a fact. Think about that: you are seemingly making excuses for someone who took down a CIA operative (one of the good guys). The fact that you (and apparently others) thought "his wife was any more than an office worker anyway" is somehow justification for what has happened? [She was more than an office worker, by the way. Even Novak acknowledges this.]

I love how you attempted to make a correlation between Wilson and Kerry. I never mentioned the Senator, so why have you? Is this an indicator of just how polarized you are? Furthermore, how in the world does your claim that "nobody bought his book" give credibilty to, or justify in any way, the despicable act that has been done? I guess you are implying that book sales are the true indicator of validity.

 

So do I, and apparently, we are the only ones.

Are you saying that the ends justify the means?

When she was "outed," everyone associated with her and her cover were compromised. If we don't even know the scope of her role, how could we know if anyone was in "real physical danger?"

I cannot believe that you would actually post this. I guess that it doesn't really matter to you that someone actually compromised one of our CIA operatives. CMG even made an attempt to make a connection between Wilson and Kerry. [A CONSPIRACY, I knew it!!]

I think that is what I am trying to say here......................

Hey, you're right: let's not blame the guy who committed the despicable act - let's only go after the person/people who provided the information.

 

Hey Galatian: I guess we should either dismount or continue to the horizon.

 

BIR,

Were you this concerned when crimes were committed and people's lives were destroyed in the Clinton Whitehouse?

Just wondering.

 

This business about Wilson is old hat. I am no longer up to speed on the issue. But I can tell you that the issue is not important to the American people because Bush was re-elected. And I can tell you that Iraq was trying to buy yellow-cake uranium in Africa. This was established in Britain by the Butler Commission. Senator Kerry had intelligence briefings as the Democrat candidate but he chose to make a false statement on this issue shortly after he was nominated.

 

You mean back when I was a Republican?
Yes.

As someone who does not appear to be too terribly concerned, were you?

 

So are you saying that this makes everything okay? If you are, that is more than just a little disturbing.

So, are you saying that Joseph Wilson is lying? And assuming that you do, that makes it okay to "out" a CIA operative? That too is disturbing.

Here you go again with Senator Kerry. I wrote about Joseph Wilson, his wife, and Robert Novak, whereas you discuss Senator Kerry. I wonder if you will interject Bill Clinton into the discussion (as hardsheller has) when you reply to this.

I can only assume that you believe that it is perfectly acceptible to "out" a CIA operative. Again, that is disturbing.

 

You mean back when I was a Republican?
Yes.

As someone who does not appear to be too terribly concerned, were you? </font>[/QUOTE]Naaaa. Bill was just a good ol' boy from Arkansas. What more could we expect?

 

Galatian,

The list has to do with neoconservatism. You might take a look near the top of the screen to find out that was the actual subject here. I suspect that if you actually asked the person who posted the OP, you'd probably find he agrees that my list is probably closer to the original topic that the tangent you guys are riding off on. But, then, you may not care.

 

My estimate of Clinton would drop a few notches if anyone can show that someone in his WH was sufficiently disloyal to America, to do something like this.

What do you have in mind?

 

Well back to the subject: Neo-conservatism

I'm currently reading "The Essential Neo-Conservative Reader" edited by Mark Gerson.

I checked it our of the library since some have accused me of being one.

 

Well the closest thing I can think of off the cuff that compares with ruining somebody's life and can be called "dispicable" would be "Travelgate."

 

Billy Dale didn't actually ruin anyone's life. What he did was mingle funds to which he had been entrusted, with his personal funds.

It was a highly unethical thing to do, and it cost him his job. It should be illegal.

As far as I know, most or all of the money was eventually recovered.

And Clinton, to his credit, fired him for it. Dale was indicted, but was found not guilty.

While he did something very wrong, I don't think he actually ruined anyone's life.

Do you? If that's the worst example of wrongdoing by a Clinton staffer, I'd say you were on the losing side of this one. How does that begin to compare with a Bush staffer exposing a CIA agent and her contacts to the enemy?

 

Of course you don't have to play, but I remain curious if any of you agree with any of the statements I listed on page 4.

 

It's amazing that I hear thing I never heard when I read Galatian's posts!

The correct spin of the story was that Hillary and Bill wanted their own people in the travel office and ruined Billy Dale's career in order to get it done.

 

I can, easily. Some people have abandoned truth in exchange for blind loyalty to a political party.

 

72 Violations of U.S. Code Under Bill's Reign of Lies in Whitehouse.

Click Here-----&gt; 72 Violations

 

Would like to hear about that book.

BiR, of course, it is wrong to out a CIA agent, etc. I believe in the rule of law. Don't think that alleged Novak's role in that case has anything to do with his history of neo-conservatism, do you? By the way, Novak does not have to reveal his sources under freedom of the press. I would say that someone leaked to Novak in order to get the lady fired, which is what she deserved for making a political issue out of an intelligence matter. It turned out that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa as established by the Butler Commission. Kerry's failure to deal with that issue must have cost him some votes.

I think the whole neo-con thing is essentially to call Jews who left the Democrat Party a name, but I don't know. I don't know any neo-cons. My family was Taft Republicans on both sides. We used to think that the only good Democrats were ones like Grover Cleveland who had been dead for a long time.