When Karl Rove spoke these words:
"Conservatives saw the savagery of the Sept. 11 attacks and the prepared for war. Liberals saw the savagery of the Sept. 11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers"
Were you not sure if he meant you when he referred to liberals?
Here's a simple quiz that will assist you in answering this question. Grab a pen and paper and keep track of your answers. I've even included lots of pictures so it's that much easier.
Okay, let's begin:
#1-Look at the picture below, was this a result of America's evil imperialist policies overseas?
Yes or No
#2-Is the man pictured below more evil and worse for America than Osama bin-Laden?
Yes or No
#3-Should this man have been left in power even though many mass graves have been found containing the remains of his victims, including children?
Yes or No
#3-Do you agree that the picture below should never be shown again, especially on TV?
Yes or No
#4-Did President Bill Clinton respond correctly to the events portrayed below?
African Embassy Bombings
USS Cole Bombing
Somalia
Yes or No
#5-Do you believe that the US has no right to invade a country whose leader commits atrocities such as the one shown below and depose that leader?
Yes or No
#6-I agree with the following statement: The war in Iraq is not a part of the greater war on terror, it is a war concocted by the Bush Administration to benefit "Big Oil", Haliburton and the Defense Industry (This may be a little tougher because it contains no pictures).
Yes, I agree with the above statement
No, it sounds like something Michael Moore would spew in between bites of a turkey leg.
#7-Fahrenheit 9/11 is a truthful rendering of the events that occurred on 9/11 and the run-up to the war in Iraq?
Yes or No
That's the quiz. If you answered "yes" to any of the questions, you can rest assured that Karl Rove was most likely referring to you.
How'd you do?
Posts
56 comments:
I did poorly. I said no more often than my 16 month old does in an average minute.
-J
I said no to all of them, so I guess His Royal Magician Rove wasn't referring to me. May he manipulate forever.
I'm surprised more leftys haven't come looking for a fight. C'mon leftys, is that all ya got?
I almost said yes to #5, but since I had said no to every other one, I re-read #5. No to all questions.
As Charles chums the water for fools ....
Crap. I said yes to #3. Of course, I really don't watch TV.
Will I burn for that?
Les,
You are right, there are two number threes, I was trying to keep it under ten so the people who answered yes to any of the questions wouldn't have to take off their shoes. I figured they wouldn't notice.
Still no leftys. I'm disappointed. Bring it on leftys...
Did Charles Johnson really say "bring it on..?"
Poor choice of words, 1400+ lives later.
Did Charles Johnson really say "bring it on..?"
Poor choice of words, 1400+ lives later.
Why?
Bouzouki,
Perhaps you will take a step back and realize that those 1,400 men and women were fighting for something you would never understand. They were fighting for something that most people who serve feel; love of country, protection of family and destruction of all those who wish to cause harm to either.
The fight is currently in their front, side and backyards instead of yours. You should be thankful to those 1,400 instead of using their dead bodies as a flag to rally the sorry left.
As always if ignorance is bliss, liberalism must be nirvana. Why do the left cause me to hate so bad.
1. Fantastic post. Congratulations.
2. I have to disappoint you, because the liberals can't think or argue to give a coherent answer.
2 days ago I posted the following questions on the major liberal blogs (except daily kos, where I AM BANNED ...hahaha... did someone at kos say Freedom of Speech or Free Flow of Ideas or Let's Debate?...no wonder the loony left at dailykos can't have a reasonable debate or a coherent argument).
No liberal answered!
1. Withdraw from Iraq?
Yes or no?
2. Troops.
a. Send more troops?
b. Bring back more troop?
c. Keep the same level of troops?
3. Money.
a. Spend more money on Iraq?
b. Reduce the amount of money spend on Iraq?
c. Keep the current amount of spending on Iraq?
4. Timetable.
a. Announce the timetable to witdraw?
b. Do not announce a timetable to withdraw?
5. Declare the Iraq war was:
a. For oil
b. a conspiracy by the neocons to support Israel
c. to spread democracy in the Middle East
d. a fight against the terrorists
e. a mistake
f. stupid
g. second Vietnam
h. _____(fill in your answer)
6. Support of our troops.
a. We support what our troops are doing in Iraq?
b. We do not support what our troops are doing in Iraq?
7. When an American soldier blows up a terrorist or an insurgent
a. We support him/her
b. We do not support him/her
8. When an American soldier is ordered to attack or blow up a terrorist/insurgents
a. We support him/her
b. We do not support him/he
9. Is this a moral war?
a. yes
b. no.
10. This is an immoral war, but I support our troops shooting and killing Iraqis
a. yes
b. No
11. This is an immoral war, but I support our troops being killed in this immoral war
a. yes
b. No
12. Is this a just war?
a. yes
b. no
13. Its not a just war, but Isupport our troops fighting/killing/being killed in the unjust war
a. Yes
b no.
14. Its better to kill the insurgents/terrorists in Iraq than in USA
a. yes
b. no
15. We will stay in Iraq until the casualties are
a. 3,000 men
b. 5,000 men
c. 10,000 men
d. ______ (fill in a number)
16. 2,000 American soldiers died
a. in vain
b. for the defense of our country
17. This is a moral war and the soldiers did not die in vain?
a. yes
b. no
18. This is an immoral war and President Bush bears the blame for every soldier that died in the war
a. yes
b. no
3. One lunatic leftist answered as such, "These are false choices, but # 18 is yes." I suspect he/she had a Ph.D in psychology, sociology or political science from an Ivy League University.
4. I suggest everyone take "Am I a liberal" test at www.dennisprager.com. Its fantastic.
5. And to make fun of the lunatic left and the morally bankrupt and intellectually deficient liberalism, you can visit me at
"http://satire.myblogsite.com/blog"
The quiz was amusing, but answering any of your questions with "yes/no" belies the complexity of the issues and of international politics in general. Rove's comments were true in that I think the liberal public were more hesitant to support a war, and more interested in getting all the information first, or looking for alternative solutions. What made Rove's comments unnacceptable was the implication that liberals/democrats do not care about the casualties of our troops, or even worse, that we WANT our troops to die. Nothing could be further from the truth. Either way, the democrats in the government all jumped on the war wagon in the beginning, so it is pure spin to say that liberals have never been supportive of the war or have been against it all along. It's the same thing that happened in Vietnam; the administration in power is failing to deliver, so they have to blame that failure on those who chose not to lend their support. Really, you're only encouraging the propagation of false stereotypes that divide our nation, rather than providing for genuine discussion or understanding; is that really beneficial?
--Lefty
Lefty-
...belies the complexity of the issues and of international politics in general.
That's the kind of muddled thinking that results in a united states senator accusing the military of war crimes comparable to Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. Look again at picture 3B- should the image of that innocent american citizen plunging 100+ floors be striken from the historical record and never again given a public viewing? Yes or no will suffice.
the administration in power is failing to deliver
Taliban out of power, democracy in Afghanistan, Bin-Laden hidding, Saddam in his underwear, Uday and Qusay dead, Lybia giving up nukes, Lebanon expelling Syria, and don't forget the umpteen other items of good news Chrenkoff keeps posting every week.
Bush continues to deliver, and you libs continue in your delusion.
I guess I passed. Nicely said.
Glenn,
**Look again at picture 3B- should the image of that innocent american citizen plunging 100+ floors be striken from the historical record and never again given a public viewing? Yes or no will suffice.**
Forgive me for forgetting to mention 3B as an exception. I feel completely comfortable answering "no" with regard to 3B, but not because of the picture's particular association with 9-11, but because I generally don't approve of censorship. Obviously we should not forget 9-11, but other than not forgetting it, we are free to feel as we will about it. For some, violence justifies more, retaliatory violence. For others it does not.
**Bush continues to deliver, and you libs continue in your delusion.**
It certainly did look like a smashing success when Bin Laden drove the soviets out of Afghanistan thanks to all the weapons and money we gave him, didn't it. We really patted ourselves on the back for that one...
That is not at all to say that the Taliban and/or Saddam being out of power is a bad thing. I simply think that you are not treating these issues with the complexity they deserve. Is that just a product of my "delusion?"
--Lefty
1. Lefty-
... belies the complexity of the issues and of international politics in general.
This is another way of saying "These are false choices." Now any 6th grader can give an answer. But it takes a graduate degree in a liberal arts to rationalize a reluctance to face the reality. (Did someone say the liberals are a "reality-based" community? ouch).
2. Let me ask another question:
How many kos kidz will flunk the test?
a. 105%
b. 100%
c. 95%
d. 90%
e. all of the above (ok, ok, the last one was a trick question).
**This is another way of saying "These are false choices."**
The fact that the wrong questions are being asked is more important than the fact that the dichotomies
are artificially imposed.
**Now any 6th grader can give an answer.**
Yes, 6th graders often won't think twice about submitting to whatever initial conditions presented to them. The ability to simply give an answer does nothing toward making that answer satisfactory.
**But it takes a graduate degree in a liberal arts to rationalize a reluctance to face the reality.**
You wanted a self-described liberal to show up so I took the bait; but you don't want a discussion. These aren't arguments you're putting up, you're just trying to make my position seem less valid by way of the usual stereotypes. You can say liberals shuffle their feet because they are afraid to face reality. I can just as easily say you're oversimplifying everything into black and white terms because you're either narcissistic or because acknowledging the true complexity of these issues is intimidating or intellectually daunting. Who's right? I've played along. Let's talk about the issues rather than beating straw men with sticks.
Jay Bird:
If I had meant "nuanced" I would have said "nuanced." I said "complex."
What exactly do you mean by "the American people rejected 'nuanced?'"
First time reader. I support Pres. Bush and I support the War on Terror, but I answered yes to 3B.
I'm not advocating censorship...but I believe the photo should generally not be shown on TV. Possibly if the viewer has been warned in advance. I went to the Spy Museum in Washington DC and felt the same way about a film in which you see the WTC collapsing. The photo should not be stricken from the historical record, nor should the videos of the planes crashing or the buildings collapsing. But to see it is like a dagger to the heart of anyone who has ever cried for the victims in the WTC. It's a painful reminder of how they died. The first few days after Sep. 11, the TV channels' showing the planes crashing into the WTC over and over did not serve a journalistic purpose and did real psychological harm to children (as well as adults). Thanks for letting me share my opinion.
Ravi
(saini@umich.edu)
I said yes to number 3. Why? Because such an image should never be shown again, because it should never happen again. That's me reasoning and I'm sticking to it.
Raarrgh!
Gotta be tough to be a liberal, isn't it?
Let's make more fun at
"Let's have fun"
http://satire.myblogsite.com/blog
Great post!
Pls submit this to the RINO Sightings.
Stephen
Boy, just don't think. Just bomb, you fascist idiots. Blame, blame, blame Clinton. WHEN ARE YOU GOING RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT THE US WAS ATTACKED ON YOUR KING IDIOT'S WATCH???? Remember the first trade center bombing? Nothing happened on US soil after that.
Maybe your assholes in Congress should have been focusing on fighting terrorism rather than impeaching a president for having an affair.
Go join the military if you support this war so much. Sign up your draft age kids now!!!! Thought so.
You soulless people are pathetic. Go back to your SUVs with those damn ribbons on it. That's REALLY fighting the "war on terror".
I was about to say the left won't get the quiz, however the post, of course by a spinless lefty who would eeven leave a screen name, shows i don't need to really state that point. It's very dishearting to see what the disease of political extremism does to people when it blinds them
You've been linked!
The Art of the Blog - Pop quiz
Blog on!
Lefty,
You are correct in stating that the majority of democrats did and still do support the war in Iraq, however it is the extreme left of the party who never did and never will support the war or any act of war justified or or not( I beleive the war in iraq is justified btw). As for us righties seeing things only in black and white. ABSOLUTLEY. Some things are black and white, there is evil in this world pure and simple. Sadam was EVIL period end of story no complex issue there. The same with Bin Laden, Pol Pot and Hitler. opps I put Sadam in with them instead of Bush. You the KISS method (keep it simple stupid) generally works the best. making simple issues complex doesn't work.
Well I did step into a public school once, so I instinctively answered those questions in a manner that would get me the best grade as determined by a public school teacher. Karl Rove is mean.
If you repugs prepared for war, then what are you doing typing on the keybord and not lined up at your local recrutement station? snif snif, I smell chickenhawk.
To Anonymous at 8:57 AM.
Bin-Laden made very clear that the reason he attacked us on 9/11 was because we cut and ran during the first Bush administartion and during Clinton's two terms.
As for joining the military, I am a veteran. If you would have taken the time to look around, you may have noticed that.
If my son chose to join the military, I would whole-heartedly support him as it is the most honorable profession.
Idiots like you choose to come into the debate with the cover of anonymity and drop inane statements then go back under your rock.
I assume you're a man, in bodily maeup at least, have the huevo's to state your position and debate like one.
OYE! LONG LIVE JESUS' GENERAL
YOU CHICKEN FUCKERS
So lets sign your son up then.
Another anonymous troll. Just for your edification, I commmented on Chickenhawks here:
http://environmentalrepublican.blogspot.com/2005/06/sending-sons-and-daughters-to-war.html
I imagine you went to a public school to learn such excellent spellng skills.
So let's see, I have debunked your entire argument, I am not a chickenhawk, I am a vet, and I did go through a recruiter once, on my way to boot camp.
Just to clear up one thing that some idiotarian posted. Bin Laden never received material support from the US during the Afghanistan / Soviet war. There was a debate on whether to support only local elements in the fight against the Soviet invasion, or to also arm and train foreign fighters flowing into Afghanistan to wage a jihad. After the Islamic revolution in Iran, it was decided to only support local elements of the resistance.
Unfortunately, Saudi Arabia DID support foreign jihadists, including Bin Laden, and the results were that the local Pashtun tribe owed too much to the jihadists after the war to deny them (the pre-cursor elements of Al Queda) safe haven. Local religious extremists (which we did support) ultimately teamed up with foreign jihadists (which we didnt') to place the Taliban in power.
Of course, there were elements in between, and some local forces that we provided arms to turned around and provided them to foreigners, but no direct aid flowed from the US to foreign fighters, much less Bin Laden himself. In fact, there were many more people that we helped in the Afghanistan/Soviet war in the Northern Alliance than were part of the Taliban.
"Lefty" is doing a real good impersonation of Neville Chamberlain and the LLL/MSM of the late 1930's.
Of course we all know what happened to them. Chamberlain was run out of office with this quote ringing in his ears "Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!"
The BBC/MSM of the time all of a sudden figured out that Winston Churchill was not the "drunken imperialist warmonger" they had made him out to be. They discovered that he was right and their arrogant azzes were wrong.
William Joyce (the Michael Moore of the day) showed his true colours, defected to Germany and became known as "Lord Haw-Haw" for his propaganda broadcasts.
Saddam was a tyrant with no WMD, Kim Jong Il is still a tyrant and he now has WMD thanks to GWB. Saddam, because of his non religious regime had no clear connection to Jihadists, but Iran supported killing and kidnapping Americans since 1979. They also are about to have WMDs. Forgive me for being a little jaded, but "Top Guns" diplaying of "mission accomplished", self congratulatory chickenhawk statements such as "bring them on" and approximate statement such as the "last throes" lasting 12 years won't make the U.S. safer, not even with the chickenhawks enlisting. It will however continue on producing a sense of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubts that will allow people like you to thrive but not for the good of the nation. Good luck on your "mission".
Choose Yes or No
1. You are a school teacher living paycheck to paycheck. You stand to inherit $2,000,000 and are politically liberal.
Do you want the estate tax done away with?
2. You joined the military to fight Serbian war crimes in order protect and defend the Bosnians from torture, kidnapping and mass grave burial.
3. You joined the military to fight Iraq terrorists in order to protect and defend our country from attack.
4. You joined the military to fight Iraq terrorists in order to promote democracy.
5. You did not join the military, but have a yellow ribbon on the back of your SUV.
6. A private company takes your home in order to build a toll, which results in a road tax cut for all. Are you happy?
7. You can explain in understandable terms to your 5 year old what a filibuster is, and why it isn't a good idea.
Hmm... I know people on the right who leave anonymous comments that sound like lefties attacking the right just to rile up the righties. One never knows.
I was directed to this "quiz" by a righty. Does the right never tire of repeating their rhetoric? I mean, shouldn't you all be focusing on how to fix up the mess you made in Iraq rather than trying to blame its failures on the left? We weren't the ones who refused to listen to top military brass when they said they needed more troops. We weren't the ones who didn't develop an exit strategy before the war. We weren't the ones who lied to the American people about the reasons for going to war. We weren't the ones who failed to provide the proper equipment to the troops. We aren't the ones who are failing to provide adequate health to soldiers who are returning minus limbs, sight, hearing, and mental capacity. We aren't the ones who have let the Taliban return to Afghanistan while you were distracted by the Iraq war. We weren't the ones who failed to construct a government where Sunnis didn't feel left out.
If y'all are so patriot, why aren't you signing up for military service and going over to fight in Iraq?
By the way, you war = peace people are really becoming the minority. Most Americans are seeing the reality that is Iraq, and your President is not all that popular these days.
Daedalus,
I take it you failed the quiz?
very funny, george.
You don't have to be a lefty to say "yes" to #3.
Dang! I'm not sure how I did. I said "NO" 22 times, but there are only 7 questions.
It's a puzzlement!?
Fire!Fire!Fire! said:
Didya ever notice how the liberals are a bunch of crybabies?
They're the first to start calling names,but when they get called names in return they cry for their mommies.
They're the first to say;"If you're such a hawk,why don't you enlist?"
I think most of us who've already served in the military would go back in to kill terrorists if the services would have us back.
But the bald truth is, that war is a young mans business.
But this American has taken the attacks against this country very personally.
You see,my best friend and best man at my wedding was murdered on 9/11 in the south tower.
Liberals understand this to mean that I want revenge.
Damn straight I want revenge.
I want VENGENCE for my best friends son,who will never get the chance to know his old man like I knew him.
So, yeah! I want revenge for the people killed on 9/11 and I want revenge for the 1700+ brave souls killed in the fight thus far.
I don't hate Bill Clinton because he was getting his wick wet when he should have been acting PRESIDENTIAL.
I don't Hate Bill Clinton Like Lefty's Hate George Bush.
I don't think George Bush Lied to take us to war,but I do KNOW that Bill Clinton lied under oath about getting his wick wet.
That FACT remains,We are a NATION AT WAR. We didn't ask for WAR,our ENEMY brought the WAR to us.
NOW, you ignorant left leaning dickheads,WE ARE BRINGING THE WAR TO THEM. And I hope we don't stop until we KILL every single one of THEM.
EVERY FUCKING COCKSUCKING TERRORIST MOTHERFUCKER.
FUCK 'EM...KILL 'EM ALL.
THEN AND ONLY THEN...BRING THE TROOPS HOME.
PS All you LIBERALS can kiss my ass. Fuck you ,who needs you anyway? You're part of the problem,Try being part of the solution for a change.
PPS Yeah,you asshole LIBERAL...
I'M TALKING TO YOU!
My,My,,,Aren't I a potty mouth!
Bow down before me, the ANTI-CHRIST!
> As Charles chums the water for fools ....
And Democrats... But I repeat myself...
(Tip o' the hat to the illustrious Mr. Clemons...)
I was almost perfect until I misread one of the questions. I said "Yes" to Rove being incapable of having sex. At least I think I misread it -- maybe not.
This is pathetic.. You're all so damn good at flaming liberals, more so than going out and putting your words into action...such as ,Going to your local millitary Enlistment office.
So, you use these photos and talking points to basically prove a point,,that liberals aren't going to respond the way you want..so "F**k em'??
I wont go into the other talking points, that Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11..
Do I have to remind you, that war is pure hell?? And that before we undertake such an ambitious plan, that it be just, and aboulutely necessary?..Did you forget about that part?..
Not real critical thinkers are ya?..
This lib invites you to "Bring it on"..
The "Fight them there, instead of here" mentality shows you to be a coward, "Oh please go start a war over there, and keep me safe here, we'll give up whatever liberties to keep us safe!".. What a bunch of cowards..
And this..all on a July 4th weekend.. Those critical thinking men in Philadelphia that morning, with the British down our throats, would all be ashamed of our uncivil discourse. Karl Rove really crossed the line. That is a guy, that needs to shut up.
Hey Donkeykong, perhaps you are incapable of reading or just choose not to see several facts that are very clear; I am a veteran and have served and the US has not been attacked since 9/11.
Maybe the GWB strategy just may be working. Could we get hit tomorrow? Yes, but think back to 9/12/01 and tell me you weren't thinking that a full scale terrorist plot was about to erupt.
Be intellectually honest with yourself and others who read this site.
I couldn't care much less about this inane survey or the responses to it. I have no political affiliation. GWB is a twat. Likewise, Bill Clinton is a prick. I've just been desperately seeking an honest answer to the following question:
How do you justify aligning yourself with a president who rarely forms a coherent, stutter free sentence without the use of a teleprompter?
I realize many of you are zealots and support this man to the point that you willingly completely disregard his total mental incompetence. I live in Tennessee, I'm used to you. Those of you humble enough to admit that you do support him regardless of his quite simian intellectual capacity; what say you?
Who ever is Posting as Charles, from LGF is full of shit and not really Charles. They are faking.
Charles is a shameless apologist for Israeli atrocities, and the level of support for Bush in the comments above is shocking. Now I know where to find the dwindling, bit-slow-on-the-uptake 20% of America that still supports him.
Beware, anyone and be anyone online.
Like me..I'm really a girl.
Note: Charles Johnson of LGF doesn't comment on other sites.
Anyone who does, is not him. If they pretend to be him, they are imposters.
There are over a billion Muslims in the world. Of that billion, let us postulate that some 100,000 are prone to religious bigotry and violence.
How would you go after these nuts? One way would be do convince them to gather all in one place, where they would lose the advantages of "home turf", where the local people would be able to identify them by their language. These nuts would alienate the local people with their insanity every time they took control, and once they took control they could be identified and wiped out.
It would be helpful if the local people were both Sunni and Shia, but had some strong secular traditions which would make the foreigners stand out.
It would also be nice if while luring the nuts to this location that you could take down a dictator who had murdered several hundreds of thousands, used poison gas, invaded other countries, and had his intelligence services support terrorism (like the first WTC bombing) in the US. It would be a good idea to invade after a history of UN resolutions pointing out the illegal acts of said dictator, and after he failed to keep an agreement with the US that ended previous hostilities.
Oh, gee. We did just that. The screwballs are dying by the bushel.
Nevermind.
I am always amazed that when a Republican goes to Harvard and Yale, and serves as a fighter pilot, he must be an idiot. By contrast, when a Democrat goes to Yale or Harvard, and avoids service in the military, but spends time picking out china patterns for the White House, they are clever, nuanced, and somehow picked up useful experience for running the country.
Post a Comment