Russian Propagandists are Hard at Work Spinning Invasion as America's Fault 2008

[RiversideGator]

LOL.  Do you guys seriously believe the college student working at a burger grill story?  Thats um...in a word....amazing.  No wonder you guys don't actually read the links and posts that get posted before making these bizarrely decisive statements.

I do not believe this is midway's true occupation.  It doesnt really matter what he does though.  He is wrong on the issues in any case.

I see that Riverside hasnt even bothered explaining his thesis that Midway somehow created a work of fiction by posting the article from another website.

My guess is that River hasnt bothered reading the actual post, except to see the graphic at the top of the page, and since River doesnt get online humor, stopped reading.

Actually Stephen, I did read the entire post on the silly blog midway linked to.  And it did not even support midway's contentions.  For the record, midway posted this in his own words:

Rove was whispering into Saakashvili's ear, hoping to precipitate a full blown war between Georgia and Russia, which would divert voter's attention from the economy, and social woes, to reinvigorate the "cold war". If the election can be reframed so that the specter of communism and the USSR can dominate the election, McCain wins. Rove played Saakashvili like an English concertina. that's why he looked like all of his blood had been drained from him when he was standing next to Condi and signing the treaty, because he knew he had been double crossed. So now Rove is formulating US foreign policy as well, which would be a violation of federal law.

I think it is reasonable to ask one who is making such extreme claims to back them up with some evidence.  The fact that midway is unable to do so indicates that the story is wholly false.

My second guess is that River then didnt even bother googling the subject to see how many other blogs and news sources also carried the story.

This isnt my job.  I am not making the accusation.  You prove your statements and I will prove mine.  This is the way it works.

My third guess is that River cannot accurately describe the nature of the connection between Rove and Georgia (and McCain's Staffer) as implied by any of the literature.

You describe it if you think it is relevant to the claim that Rove precipitated the Russia-Georgia conflict.  The burden is on you.

I would go so far as to say that the 1950s era geiger counter that functions as River's brain merely has to hear "Rove" and "Something negative sounding" in the same sentence in order to start making "Danger Will Robinson" signals and engaging the electronic typecaster sequencing.

Another ad hominem attack.

So River, since you have utterly failed to make or prove your point, I dare you.  No I double dog dare you,  nay----make that triple dog dare you to PROVE that you arent as shallowly knee jerk reacting as appearances would make you and actually DESCRIBE what you believe to be your 'opponent's' thesis and argument are.

Come on, surely on your way to Jacksonville lawyering you took a debate course or two.

You can do it.

My point was that I doubt that the statement above by midway is true.  I asked him to produce some, ANY, evidence that it was.  How do I prove the fact that I would like to see evidence to support his conspiracy theories?   

[Charleston native]

As is the case for most liberals, Rove is the "magnificent bastard" who is the puppetmaster for all things Republican. This is the premise for Midway's claims.

Thus, any sort of rumor that can be conjured which reinforces this illusion of Rove being a manipulative god will be believed wholeheartedly and repeated ad nauseum. Another SOP for liberals and socialists alike: repeat the lie often enough, and it will become truth. When asked for evidence, commence ad hominem attacks and repeat the lie.

[Charleston native]

Stephen, let me be clear.

I'm not a fan of Rove by any means. However, I think many liberals and media give him more credit (or in this case, more power) than he is due. The man seems to have the persona of the anti-Christ, according to liberal sources and the MSM...well, those are one in the same, but I digress. 

[RiversideGator]

I think it is reasonable to ask one who is making such extreme claims to back them up with some evidence.  The fact that midway is unable to do so indicates that the story is wholly false.

So the idea that I believe that Jesus was divine is wholly false?

I agree with you on this point.  This is a matter of faith.

[RiversideGator]

As is the case for most liberals, Rove is the "magnificent bastard" who is the puppetmaster for all things Republican. This is the premise for Midway's claims.

Thus, any sort of rumor that can be conjured which reinforces this illusion of Rove being a manipulative god will be believed wholeheartedly and repeated ad nauseum. Another SOP for liberals and socialists alike: repeat the lie often enough, and it will become truth. When asked for evidence, commence ad hominem attacks and repeat the lie.

Charleston, Karl Rove is a proven liar and powermonger who has broken more laws than you ever could and gotten away with it.

Do you have to be 'liberal to despise this man?

Do you have to be 'conservative' to despise the lies told by bill clinton?

He is a liar proven by whom?  I really find it amusing the anger that is directed at Rove.  He is just a political strategist and now a television personality.  Liberals love to imagine that there is some evil puppetmaster pulling the strings which results in Republican victory.  They believe that if only the people were not fooled by this trickster they would see the light and vote Democrat.  This is actually believed by many Dems.  It is both sad and funny that they dont realize that they lost the Presidential elections in question because people did not agree with the views of their candidates and/or disliked their candidates.  It is as simple as that.

[Clem1029]

So, let me see if I get this straight...the EEEVVILLL Bush, Cheney, Rove et al, in order to distract people from Great Depression II, decide to go all "Wag the Dog," and cause a war in a country that 75% of the US couldn't identify on a map, but not before manipulating the market to bring down commodity prices to give their nefarious acts cover?

How many far-left cliches can we pack into one summary? I'm just astounded than any normal thinking person could actually see this and say "hey...that makes sense." I mean...ok, this could be an advance plot summary of the next David Baldacci book. At least then we could treat it as it comes off...utter fiction.

Same question from the other thread...do you actually believe what you post, or do you just like to stir the pot?

[Clem1029]

Clem.  Heres a better question.  Do you actually read the goddammed posts or do you share a geiger counter brain with river?

Read my post above and see what I actually think, then perhaps rephrase your silly little screed.

I love it...I post a satirical take on a an insane article, and how do you reply? Personal attack. I think I've figured out your MO on this board...post something either way outside normal thought processes, or over-hyped beyond belief, wait for someone to disagree with it, and the insult them personally without actually considering the argumentation. It may be fun, but it's weak debate.

So first off, my original question still stands - do you actually BELIEVE this stuff? It's a valid question for the debate...if you're just posting to post and stir stuff up, then I know not to waste my time. If you actually believe it, it tells me how seriously I need to dismantle it, as well as the intellectual capacity of the person I'm debating.

More importantly, let me post my "screed" a little less satirical, and see if we can keep up, and tell me how I'm missing the intent of the article.

"With commodity prices exploding, the dollar collapsing, the US leaders are tanking it's economy, bankrupting the economy and dragging the rest of the world down with it. This is obviously bad news in an election year. So in order to distract the country from economic calamity, US leaders needed to come up with a war to focus their energies on. However, a big war, with the economic issues wouldn't mix right, so to provide cover for their war, US leaders manipulated the commodity markets to provide a temporary reprieve, then gave the OK to Georgia to do whatever they wanted."

Did I miss anything here? Any part of the thesis left out?

And more importantly, assuming I'm at least in the ballpark, any attempt at a logical defense of it?

[Clem1029]

here to make it easier for you is the post that expresses my own opinion.

OK, awesome...you don't actually believe the article you posted, you just put it out there to stir stuff up. Got it.

[Clem1029]

Well I suppose it depends on what you mean by 'stir stuff up'.

I really do approach most of the topics here with an open mind.  I know that I am uninformed about a great many things and that I do not have all or even part of the answers.   By posting things on here, I hope to discuss them intelligently, parse the different ideas, learn new facts and hopefully come to a closer approximation of the truth.

Most of the time, this is the opposite of what actually happens, as there are a few posters on this board who are absolutely not interested in honest debate, but merely in regurgitating talking points which I have already gleaned from the various pundit shows.

On a few occasions I have been greatly informed by the discussion on this board, and have adjusted my own opinions accordingly.

Nuclear Power and the apparently effect of solar activity in our climate change discussions to name a few.

Why do you post?

Is it to hear your own opinions validated and unchallenged?

Ah, one of your closing moves...the "honest open-minded inquirer" approach. With the stridency you approach things, combined with your standard habit of just throwing out article after article after article with no commentary, it's not open-mindedness, it's kicking a hornet's nest.

Also, don't you think it's a little bit of "pot-calling-the-kettle-black" when you claim others just regurgitate talking points? You may want to take a glace at the Eisenhower thread if you need a refresher.

Finally, I resent the implication that that I'm just here to have everyone tell me how smart I am. In other threads, I've certainly made it known that I know what I don't know. But I do know when ideas are stupid, or, if that's too harsh, at least wrong. And all claims to open-mindedness as a virtue to the contrary, when your mind is so open that your brain falls out, that's a problem. Case in point, the article you posted. It is simply a stupid idea that's so far out of the realm of reality to be a joke. But to use it as a source to "support" an extremist point isn't debate, isn't an open-minded search for the truth. It's deliberately provocative at best, intellectually dishonest at worst.

It shouldn't be beyond the realm of fair debate to hear an idea and be able to say "that's just wrong."

[BridgeTroll]

I started by Googleing Mike Whitney... try it... nuff said.  Stephen I assume you bolded this portion of the article posted because you find it particularly compelling... you should know better.

Mike Whitney, a popular Internet commentator, observed on August 11:

"Washington’s bloody fingerprints are all over the invasion of South Ossetia. Georgia President Mikhail Saakashvili would never dream of launching a massive military attack unless he got explicit orders from his bosses at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. After all, Saakashvili owes his entire political career to American power-brokers and US intelligence agencies. If he disobeyed them, he’d be gone in a fortnight. Besides an operation like this takes months of planning and logistical support; especially if it’s perfectly timed to coincide with the beginning of the Olympic games. (another petty neocon touch) That means Pentagon planners must have been working hand in hand with Georgian generals for months in advance. Nothing was left to chance."8

It is this "Blame Bush / America first crowd that truly angers me.  The statement above is so full of holes it barely is worth a passing glance.  Mike Whitney is a bomb thrower of the same ilk as those on the right who are so frequently derided here.

[BridgeTroll]

The bolded portion was actually a carryover from the cut and paste.  I didnt even notice that it was bolded until you pointed it out.

Point taken... my apologies...

Are "America" and "George Bush" the same thing?

Absolutely not... However you must admit that there are plenty out there who quickly point the finger at Bush or America first before looking at other scenarios...

It would be nice to cut out the personal invective and simply debate ideas.  Let the ideas be dumb or smart, not the person.

Most definately on the same page here...

This type of discussion is the best part of public debate.  Im sorry that the process has been demeaned and falsified and vulgarized by the terrible partisan hackery that has come to define these threads.

Me too...

[RiversideGator]

He is a liar proven by whom?  I really find it amusing the anger that is directed at Rove.  He is just a political strategist and now a television personality.  Liberals love to imagine that there is some evil puppetmaster pulling the strings which results in Republican victory.  They believe that if only the people were not fooled by this trickster they would see the light and vote Democrat.  This is actually believed by many Dems.  It is both sad and funny that they dont realize that they lost the Presidential elections in question because people did not agree with the views of their candidates and/or disliked their candidates.  It is as simple as that.

Sorry, charlie, but no cigar.

John McCain is neither a democrat nor a liberal, nor was his primary election a 'democratic victory'.

Rove push polled in south carolina deliberately leaving the impression that John McCain had fathered a 'black baby' out of wedlock in the racially infamous state.

This was a lie, it was a deliberate lie, and it is the sleazy kind of politics which apparently you not only approve of, but also practice.

Any proof of Rove's direct involvement?  And, even if true this is a far cry from precipitating a war to aid McCain (his previous nemesis by your own admission).

[RiversideGator]

Clem.  Heres a better question.  Do you actually read the goddammed posts or do you share a geiger counter brain with river?

Read my post above and see what I actually think, then perhaps rephrase your silly little screed.

Stephen:  Are you capable of having a debate without getting angry and cursing at your opponents?

BTW, I read the post above.  Brzezinski's theory is just that - a theory.  Add to that the fact that he is a HUGE Democrat partisan and it is worthless.  Give me evidence, not theories.

Oh and Brzezinski's advice is horrible.  Under his boss Carter, America saw foreign policy debacle after debacle.  Look for more of the same if your messiah, Obama, is elected.  He even has some of Carter's same guys advising him!

[RiversideGator]

Its a well known fact that George Sr. handicapped that deal for Reagan during the election campaign.

This is mere speculation that has never been proven.  The truth probably is the Iranians feared Reagan and thought Carter was a joke.

[RiversideGator]

BTW, the article you posted is way out of date.  Commodities are now in a huge sell off and the dollar is strengthening.  You should know this as I posted about it before in another thread.