No, you need to go back and read, and exercise some common sense. Libby was Cheney’s chief of staff, working in the WH. The original charge was about Rove, Cheney, and the WH. Libby, whom you charged, is clearly a part of the WH. It is clear from my comments that they were not directed at people who charged all three, but rather that the three were commonly charged as being responsible.
Again, this is just basic common sense in reading.
No I didn’t. Go back and read. The evidence for you was Libby, in his role as a WH aide. You are making stuff up, Daisy.
I never did this, and you know it. Go back and exercise some common literary sense.
On October 9, 2004 at 11:14 am, I said, The intelligence turned out to be wrong, but there was no way to know that at the time. We found out the intelligence was wrong because we took action. We found out it wasn'r real only because we took decisive action.
I did not accuse you of saying that Cheney and Rove lied. I accused you of holding a double standard, which should be clear to anyone who understands even the basic use of rhetoric and communication.
Yes, it was disinterested. I really don’t care. But I thought I would point out the hypocrisy involved. You can let your emotions and political ideals get involved. But it should not cause you to say things that aren’t true.
No, I didn’t, and no it hasn’t, apparently. The evidence says that Armitage was the original source.
If you understood rhetoric and communication, you would have very clearly seen that I did not accuse you of lying. I accused you, rightly, of having a double standard.
I don’t really care what you think of me. I don’t really know you. I imagine that in real life you are a likeable person. I imagine you would probably find me the same way. Most do. But I didn’t call you a liar, as you should know. And repeating it multiple times will not change that. I specifically said you didn’t lie. I pointed out a double standard on your part.
You should have seen the point, and realized what it was and said, “Hey, I apparently made a mistake.”
Me either. I think he has.
If I remember the incident correctly, I was not being insulting. You have yet to show any case where I was wrong that I can recall. But the offer stands nonetheless
It was entirely sincere. It was actual. If I misunderstood and drew a wrong conclusion, I apologize. What is wrong with that?Um, that condescending, conditional thing is your idea of an apology? You are calling that an actual apology? Oh my.
You should have known it. You have seen it before.
Sure it does. You just don’t like where it leads you because you have no refutation for it.
No, consider the actual truth. Bush had evidence that WMDs existed. You had evidence that Rove, Cheney, and the WH did not out Plame. Bush had evidence that WMDs did not exist. You had evidence that Rove, Cheney, and the WH did out Plame. The examples are exactly the same. In one case, you went one way; in the other case, you went the other way. That is a double standard.
Where have I lied? You have made that charge over and over again and your only basis for it is the fact that you apparently misunderstood the original point.
That may be. But that’s not really the point here, is it?
I don’t know if JGrubbs is around or not. I assume that he is since his membership still appears to be active. I didn’t post at all from Christmas til June, primarily for the sake of time and the lack of civil discourse here. It simply wasn’t worth it. I post infrequently now.
In the end, Daisy, you messed up by not understanding the original point. I apologize that I was apparently unclear. I do not believe you lied. I think you made heated statements that have turned out to be incorrect. I think the method you used to claim that you didn’t lie is the same method that would assert that Bush didn’t lie.
I think there is a great amount of hypocrisy by the part of some of you who lean left. You will attack Bush no matter what, just as some will defend him no matter what. And I wonder if you would disagree with me if I said there were 53 states in the Union. Sometimes, I think you would.
But be that as it may, I have no ill will towards you. I wish the original post would have been clearer. If I was writing it again, I would have made it clearer from the beginning. However, now that I have explained it, I hope that you will understand better what the point was and see how inconsistent some on your side are.
