I feel like I should dedicate my blog to the daily lies told by the republicans in power

Example # 1

RNC chairman Ken Mehlman and his republican talking points about the Rove coverup are just thrown out on the MSM, like it's news, when in fact they are straight lies as Media Matters points out:

Lie #1: Wilson falsely claimed Cheney sent him to Niger

In an attack on the credibility of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, Plame's husband, Mehlman twice claimed that it was Vice President Dick Cheney who sent him to Niger in 2002 to investigate a rumored sale of yellowcake uranium to Iraq. As Media Matters for America noted, Wilson claimed the CIA -- not Cheney -- sent him to Africa. In his July 6, 2003, New York Times op-ed, and in an August 3, 2003, interview on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, Wilson noted that the CIA sent him to Niger to investigate a question from Cheney's office about the uranium issue. The RNC cropped and twisted quotes from the Times op-ed and the CNN interview to back up this false talking point.

From Mehlman's July 12 appearance on CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports:

MEHLMAN: Karl was right; Joe Wilson was wrong. The story was false. It was based on a false premise, and, of course, the conclusion was false. [...] What Joe Wilson alleged was that the vice president, then he said the CIA director, sent him to Niger.

From Mehlman's July 13 appearance on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MEHLMAN: Karl Rove said to a reporter that you ought not include the Joe Wilson report because it's inaccurate. And Karl was right. Mr. Wilson was wrong. The report was inaccurate. He was wrong in the sense that the vice president had not sent him down.

Lie #2: Rove did not reveal Plame's name, so he did nothing wrong

In an email summarizing a conversation with Rove, Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper stated that Rove referred to Plame as "Wilson's wife." Relying on this report, Mehlman claimed that Rove did not leak Plame's identity because he did not reveal her name. But, as is clear from the language of the statute and Rove's own lawyer, this defense has no legal merit. Moreover, as a practical matter, anyone with access to Google could very easily have come across Wilson's Corporate & Public Strategy Advisory Group bio, which noted: "He is married to the former Valerie Plame."

Lie #3: Rove didn't even know her name

Mehlman also cited the Newsweek article containing Cooper's email as evidence that Rove "didn't even know" Plame's name at the time he talked to Cooper. But as Think Progress pointed out, a July 15 New York Times article reported that Rove told investigators that three days before his July 11, 2003, conversation with Cooper, he learned Plame's name from syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, who outed Plame in a July 14, 2003, column.

From the July 12 Wolf Blitzer Reports:

MEHLMAN: The fact is, Karl Rove did not leak classified information. He did not, according to what we learned this past weekend, reveal the name of anybody. He didn't even know the name, so he couldn't have revealed it.

From the July 15 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

MEHLMAN: One article last weekend was an article in Newsweek, which I thought exonerated Karl Rove in many ways. What it said was Karl Rove was not leaking anybody's name, he didn't know that name.

Lie #4: Wilson claimed his mission to Niger "positively proved" that the country had not sold nuclear materials to Iraq

During his recent appearances, Mehlman has attempted to impugn Wilson's credibility by falsely alleging that he claimed his Niger findings conclusively refuted the allegation that Iraq had purchased or attempted to purchase nuclear materials from Niger.

The CIA sent Wilson to the African nation in February 2002 to investigate such allegations. Upon his return, he disclosed his findings in a CIA debriefing, which were later disclosed to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Wilson's New York Times op-ed presented his personal interpretation of his findings -- specifically, that they did not support President Bush's claim in his 2003 State of the Union address that "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

From the July 12 Wolf Blitzer Reports:

BLITZER: When you say the story was false, is there any evidence Niger was sending uranium, enriched uranium to Iraq?

MEHLMAN: What Joe Wilson alleged was that the vice president, then he said the CIA director sent him to Niger. He then alleged that he wrote a report which positively proved that, in fact, that wasn't occurring and that the vice president sat on the report.

BLITZER: But the upshot of his bottom line report to the CIA was there was no evidence uranium, enriched uranium, yellowcake as it's called, was being sent to Iraq. So he was right on that.

MEHLMAN: Well, both the Senate Intelligence Committee and others who have studied it have found that, in fact, his report was largely irrelevant to that finding.

From the July 13 Hardball:

MEHLMAN: Joe Wilson's comments on Newt Gingrich, like his comments on so many other things, who sent him to Niger, the definitiveness of his report, whether the vice president reviewed his report, all of these allegations have been disproved by the Senate Intelligence Committee and by others who have studied it who are objective sources. Once again, what Joe Wilson said is not supported by the facts.

But Wilson never claimed that he had provided definitive evidence that the Bush administration's Niger claim was unfounded. Rather, he wrote in his Times op-ed that on the day after the 2003 State of the Union address, "I reminded a friend at the State Department of my trip and suggested that if the president had been referring to Niger, then his conclusion was not borne out by the facts as I understood them."

Moreover, Wilson's personal assessment of his findings, as conveyed in his Times op-ed, concurred with the assessment by the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) that the intelligence failed to support the Niger allegation and, more broadly, that Iraq had not reconstituted its nuclear program. As the Senate Intelligence Committee and the CIA have admitted, Wilson and INR turned out to be right.

Why are you not in jail?

After Bush said on Sept. 30, 2003, the day the Justice Department launched its inquiry,"If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing."

And McClellan said a week later (Oct. 7, 2003),"If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates. That's not the way this president expects people in his administration to conduct their business."

Then why is Karl Rove Still here! It's true, I severely dislike this administration, and I really don't believe much they say, but WOW! this is just too obvious and too blatant.

Especially after there is sound proof of Rove's illegal actions.

For months, the White House was emphatic in declaring that Mr. Rove had had nothing to do with the leak. But it came to light over the weekend that Mr. Rove had mentioned Mrs. Wilson - although not by name - to a Time magazine reporter before her name and position became public.

Joe Wilson, the husband of the CIA agent Rove outed, wants Rove fired.

And whatever happened to Robert Novak? Was he not involved in this? Why is he not going to be punished for his actions in helping to leak Valerie Wilson in his column? To him it's "no great crime." Maybe it's just a little crime? Maybe you should only spend a little time in jail?

Terrorists watch TV news also

At least 37 dead in London from terrorist blasts



So the U.S. raises its terror alert after the destruction has been done? Why do it after the destruction and why display the raised terror alert to the entire world? Would terrorists not just attack when the terror alert drops? If it is used as a deterrence, why not always have a raised terror alert? And if there is always a raised terror alert, why have a terror alert at all? These are just my thoughts, but they seem reasonable. Right?

If the terror scale were to be a useful tool... predict WHEN an attack would happen and report it to the proper authorities, in the proper place, and stop the attack. Don't report clues to the entire world...including terrorists.

Our President STILL can't ride a bike

Again....


From CapitolBuzz:

POTUS Was In Another Bicycle Accident

Scott confirmed that POTUS collided with a police officer during his bike ride. He was about 45 minutes into his ride, Scott said, when the accident occurred. The officer was in a security detail on the grounds of Gleneagles. The President slid on the paved surface, suffering scrapes on his hands and arms that later required treatment and bandaging by his White House physician. The officer was taken to a local hospital as a precaution, Scott said. The extent of his harm wasn't immediately clear, although he might have an ankle injury. The president had been riding -- speed undetermined -- on the road. Scott declined to name the officer, preferring to leave that to his department, identified by WH as Strethclyde Police Department. The President was mostly concerned about the officer's condition and "visited" with him for some time. Mr. Bush also asked Dr. Richard Tubb the WH physician to monitor the officer's situation at the hospital. Scott said the President likely would call the officer later. POTUS's evening plans were not disrupted and Scott said he is "fine." The presidential bike suffered some damage however and the President, who had been riding with a Secret Service agent, went back to the hotel in a SS Suburban that had been trailing.


(*Insert your own comments making fun of Shrub's abilities, or lack there of, in riding his tricycle..I mean bike.*)

Now I know what Bork means

Watching some T.V. show on msnbc, I heard the term "bork" used by a talking head. Not knowing what it was, I found out from Media Matters that the same exact term "bork" was being thrown around by the MSM and conservatives alike because of the newly opened seat on the Supreme Court.

From Media Matters:

"Borking" is a conservative term popularized in the late 1980s by the right-wing Wall Street Journal editorial page in defense of defeated Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork. Since then, conservatives have pushed the term into the lexicon whenever a conservative nominee comes under unwelcome scrutiny. As conservatives mean it, "to Bork" is "to attack a person's reputation and views unfairly," as Bork himself stated in a July 1 interview on CNN. The obvious implication of Bork having been "Borked" is that he was wrongly denied a seat on the high court. An alternate view is that the questioning of Bork's views and the characterizations of his record were appropriate and accurate, and that the Senate was correct to reject Bork as a nominee in 1987. In other words, the notion of "Borking" is right-wing mythology.

So, I must learn things the hard way. Instead of expecting to hear some sort of neutrality in reporting, I must go to an independent watchdog to find out the biased phrases used in MSM circulation.