Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I like how the Republicans are saying - Valerie Plame really wasn't an

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Tony_FLADEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 10:12 AM
Original message
I like how the Republicans are saying - Valerie Plame really wasn't an
undercover agent because she donated money to Al Gore. Gee did she disclose on her FEC form that she is an Undercover Operative for the CIA?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. That's the new "frame" --because she had a desk job, she wasn't
an undercover agent. These guys have cartoon minds: if Plame wasnt' skulking around in a trenchcoat in a foreign city, she wasn't undercover. I think it's the CIA who determine who's undercover, not Rethug mouthpieces.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatever4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. Hateful republicans should read this
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

and then they should shut the hell up.

She went without cover, the most dangerous undercover

And in naming her husband, that bastard most certainly DID use her name. She is legally entitled to that name, that name is by law linked to her, her husband. HER name. She was most surely specifically identified in the naming of her husband, with the married relationship specifically stated. Not to mention her agency being stated as well.

He just used a "different" name. It's a falsehood for him to say he didn't NAME her. A flat out lie.

A name that uniquely identifies an individual, is legally part of their identity, SURELY that is a name.

What else can it be? What else was the name WILSON good for then, was it NOT a name? What, a label? A rumor? An alias? NO. I don't think so. He named WILSON. He named HER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Duck Donating Member (464 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
3. Other republican exceptions:
The constitution doesn't really protect free speech, it just insures it, and all they're doing is raising our deductible with the patriot act.

In order for a violent act to be torture, there must be a lack of menu options. For example, if you were placed on a "rack" inside Chili's, not torture. If placed on the rack in the parking lot, we're looking at torture.

Since we lied to you about this war, and now we're encouraging our millitary recruiters to lie to prospective troops, we are instigating a strong policy of truth by appliing double negatives to the policy as a whole.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 07:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC