CIA Leak-It's Ok to kill Democrats; it's a serious fatal blow to WH

[Starpass]

I had two things to say and decided to combine in one post - there are serious implications all over the place. The Dems need to play it smart and the repukes could be looking at, finally, the big body blow. Sorry for the length--can't say it in two snappy sentences.

Couple days ago I saw late at night a political analyst who I've never seen before and his "interview" was on tape. He hit right into something I've been following and was shown just hours earlier in a NY Times Poll.

He said that this CIA leak thing is very critical to this White House because, despite Bush's falling numbers, the American people still look upon him as honest, honorable and "restoring dignity to the White House". He said that after all the crap (ie., Iraq lying mess, economy, etc.) this is the only thing they have left. He said that if this exposes them as lying, cover-up artists, corrupt, etc. that the "White House will fold like a house of cards" and crumble. Before you think this guy is a right wing shill, I knew exactly what he was talking about because I have followed it over the months in these polls (the numbers that don't make the headlines). And, just hours before was the NYTimes/CBS poll that again told the tale.

In general, it was a super great poll for us Dems. His numbers were sinking. 50% thought the asshole couldn't handle any future crisis. The majority said Iraq was NOT worth it. The majority said the country was going in the wrong direction and his "negatives" were high. BUT then there were two questions that dealt with this "honesty/integrity/good person/Christan gent type of crap. And despite all of this, the bastard rated in the 60th percentile-----in other words, we have a Ronnie on our hands. Despite even being lied to in order to go to war and kill a hell of a lot of people, they don't blame the golden boy. Remember, we thought they would hate him for the economy in '02, but polls showed after that the people didn't blame HIM for it. Yep, I know, how much more in the way of lies, graft, corruption do we have to show the people before they say: "Ya, know, sweetheart, I done don't think that boy is good"!!! We have to literally go after this perception of him being "good"...we need to personally destroy him. The Dems need to keep harping on this CIA matter and then they have to do more of the personal destruction......and that brings me to my second point.

Have you noted how the WH is portraying this CIA issue?? They are trying to smear Wilson with something far worse than being a bin Laden cult member---they are saying he probably is an EVIL DEMOCRAT--liberal, and all that crap. This is where we need our candidates and our party screaming. In a word, does this excuse the "outing" of a CIA agent?? Is it okay if the agent is or is related to a filthy Dem and thus, is of no concern if outed??? Are the laws only written to protect repukes?? Is this what this country has come to??--- if so,then a half a million more people who voted for Gore over Georgie are in danger because they are not to be protected by this government. It's like me saying that I killed someone but since I can tell you why they deserved to die, the law doesn't apply to me and I should walk on the charges. Do you see what I mean??--they are trying to tell us that the WH actions in outing this person are okay 'cause it's just a Democrat. I hope one of our people wakes up and shoves this right back into their faces because it helps to highlight how this administration feels it's okay to put a Dems life as risk and be justified in doing so. This point, right now, should be the latest headline...we are missing the boat here. We need to keep on pressing because, just like I pointed out in the beginning, we need to expose this creature as a dishonorable, filthy vermin. come on Dem candidates, start screaming on how the WH is handling this.

[Nobody]

1. I'm with you, Starpass, I hate how the Republicans get a free pass

And the people don't give a crap what kind of swill the Republicans feed them, but let a Dem offer anything but perfection itself and the media is all over it.

I noticed the game of King of the Hill started when Clinton was elected. And then there was the stolen election.

I remember distinctly that the Dems said they'd work with whoever won, once the winner was determined. The Repubs said that if it was Gore, they would do everything in their power to undermine his presidency.

And people WANT a bunch of toddlers who haven't learned how to play nice with others? I know three year olds who have more maturity.

[kiahzero]

2. Yes

And people WANT a bunch of toddlers who haven't learned how to play nice with others? I know three year olds who have more maturity.

In my limited years of exposure to the human race, I have reached an answer to your question: yes.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

3. You're 100% right but I assume the "honesty" attribute will never leave W.

And that is why I am anticipating the Democratic nominee (who I believe will be Kerry, and who can make this charge with the most authority) will say: "George, you're a well-meaning, good Christian man, but you are completely in over your head as POTUS, and it is in the best interests of this great nation, and the WORLD, that you be replaced IMMEDIATELY by a competent, intelligent leader, before more jobs are lost, more people needlessy die, and planet earth is moved closer to extinction."

[diplomats]

4. The honesty issue IS all Bush has, I agree

that's why the stonewalling could be disastrous for them.

[ComerPerro]

5. I don't see this, no matter the outcome, causing them to suffer

Because his supporters are hardcore psychotics. To them, Bush is not a liar because everything he says is true. Any evidence to the contrary is just a "liberal lie" perpetuated by the "liberal media".

And as far as the "Killing or ruining American lives is ok as long as they are Democrats" is concerned: You only need to spend ten minutes at any right wing discussion board to find that most right wingers agree with this.

[Mz Pip]

6. AN offshoot of that

happened when the story first broke. Some Repug Congressman was saying it really wasn't a big deal because nothing bad happened to Plame. So I guess it would only be considered a problem to them if something bad happened. Basic talking point seemed to be "Hey, what's the big deal? SHe's ok isn't she?"

MzPip
:dem:

[caledesi]

7. Good post SP! I am sick of these thugs referring to this as a "leak"

because that really softens it and makes it look less serious. This is a breach of national security. The Dems better not let this one go...let the thugs cry "politics" as much as they want, just keep responding with the "breach of national security."

Nothing is going to happen in the JD. I noticed today, * was very skeptical that "they would find where the leak was come from." So, they want to wrap this baby up fast and get it out of the way.

Not so fast! I hope the Dems don't let this one go.

[DrBB]

8. See my letter in the NYTimes

That's exactly the angle I'm trying to push in my small way--that the real vulnerability for these bastards in the Leak-gate case is POLITICAL more than legal: it shows just what kind of sleazy operators they--and their apologists, like Safire--are. The one thing the Flying Shrub has left is the high ratings for "trustworthy," and they're trying to preserve that by smearing Wilson--which only proves the point, since his party affiliation one way or the other is completely irrelevant to both the information he turned up and the fact that his wife was outed.

Managed to get another letter into the NYTimes about it, should be out tomorrow:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=488203

[caledesi]

9. Good letter DrBB...I will look for it in the NYT.

Who is really trying to "politicize" the issue?