Carl Rove for President

Note: he spells his name Karl Rove. People often spell it "Carl"; just remember, it's spelled the same way as Karl Marx.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 26 2006, 07:32 AM) [snapback]276799[/snapback]</div>

Which, of course, is the primary political bent of the LA Times.

BTW: I am sure that even the LA Times know that Bilbray is more than a 'lobbyist'; he had been U.S. Representative from California 49th District, 1995-2001.

Of course, in the world in which those on the LA Times editors live, any opportunity to demean a conservative will do, won't it B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 26 2006, 10:32 AM) [snapback]276799[/snapback]</div>

Rumor has it his parents created the spelling of his first name.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wstander @ Jun 26 2006, 09:58 AM) [snapback]276805[/snapback]</div>

Did you even read the article? Nope, too busy bashing.

If Bilbray's occupation from 2001 to 2006 was as a lobbyist, then what was misrepresented. They didn't call him a carpetbagger, but he was living with his mother until he won. Didn't want to take the chance of selling his home in another district and buying one in the district he was running in until he had secured his victiory, I guess.

BTW I find this sort of thing the most dangerous of the current abusive practices of the Republican party.

"In 2002, Rove told Interior Department officials of the importance of helping farmers in Oregon whose political support was crucial to Gordon Smith, a vulnerable Republican senator. Within months, perhaps because of Rove's exhortations, the agency did just that, supporting the diversion of water from the environmentally important Klamath River for the sake of irrigating farmland. Thousands of salmon eventually died in the newly shallow waters. But the senator secured his reelection."

Because a Republican getting elected is more important than a few fish. That's the difference between a liberal and a conservative.

"This year's elections are only one test of the Republicans' long-term plan to transform American politics. Unless Democrats eliminate these structural and strategic deficits, the GOP will continue to govern what has become, in effect, a one-party country."

And that one party is turning AmeriKa into a fascist state.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 26 2006, 10:58 AM) [snapback]276898[/snapback]</div>

I read the article that was linked. The gist seemed be decrying the failure of the Democrat to win Cunningham's vacated seat. They did not like the idea that someone in the GOP was able to mobilze its base to vote in an otherwise uninspiring turnout. Getting out the vote is not just a Democrtatic Party right, you know. And the Democrats are not above manipulating the so-called fact either. I do recall them cheering years ago when Dornan was defeated by Loretta Sanchez...who had been a failed Republican candidate by the name of Bixley. She, like Bill Clinton before, decided that being a Democrat was a better deal, and in her case, adopting her Hispanic surname was also politically astute. Whatever, it worked and "Loretta Sanchez' is in , and gruff talking 'B1' Bob Dornan was out.


Now, recall that this link was an 'op-ed' piece, so proofs and facts are by definition not required; it only reinforces the writer's opinion.

 

wow, think of all the cool campaign slogans:

Vote for the HOT KARL...


h34r:

:lol: