Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
"Rove Indictment" Update
Posted by: McQ on Saturday, May 20, 2006

Truthout.org, a part of the Faux News Network, has issued the following update and partial apology concerning their now week old Rove indictment story:
On Saturday afternoon, May 13, 2006, TruthOut ran a story titled, "Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators." The story stated in part that top Bush aide Karl Rove had earlier that day been indicted on the charges set forth in the story's title.

The time has now come, however, to issue a partial apology to our readership for this story. While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle. In moving as quickly as we did, we caused more confusion than clarity. And that was a disservice to our readership and we regret it.

As such, we will be taking the wait-and-see approach for the time being. We will keep you posted.
Yeah.

I'm sure.

And we'll be waiting with bated breath.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I find it rather interesting that people are willing to take the word of those with a track record of lies, as gospel truth. The current admisnitration is possibility the most corrupt in history and Rove is the professor emeritus of Nasty Politics 101. How can anyone possibly believe the denials coming from this camp now?

Des
 
Written By: Des
URL: http://
I find it rather interesting that people are willing to take the word of those with a track record of lies, as gospel truth. The current admisnitration is possibility the most corrupt in history and Rove is the professor emeritus of Nasty Politics 101. How can anyone possibly believe the denials coming from this camp now?
Well Des, it’s quite simple in this case.

Show me the indictment.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Nobody claimed to be predicting the future...they claimed an existing fact that hasn’t yet been demonstrated. A woman often knows she’s pregnant before anyone else does. Sometimes she says something to someone, sometimes she doesn’t. That doesn’t change the fact that she’s pregnant. Time eventually makes it obvious, but she was pregnant long before then.

Either he has been indicted or he hasn’t, and if he hasn’t, then the process may be in irreversible motion. At what point is an indictment viable?
 
Written By: Derek Bill
URL: http://
Nobody claimed to be predicting the future...they claimed an existing fact that hasn’t yet been demonstrated.
I love this one. Uh, Derek, it’s not a "fact" until it is "demonstrated".

Until then, and particularly in this case, it is an unfounded assertion.
At what point is an indictment viable?
Gee, I don’t know, when it’s actually served?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
I admire Mcq’s [correct] use of the phrase "’bated breath". "’Bated" is a contraction of "abated" and often mis-stated in this phrase as "baited" which makes no sense to me at all.

Dictionary.reference.com:
"a·bate: ...v. tr.
To reduce in amount, degree, or intensity; lessen..."

 
Written By: Notherbob2
URL: http://
The current admisnitration is possibility the most corrupt in history and Rove is the professor emeritus of Nasty Politics 101.
A couple of points my man, in the immortal words of Iniago Montoya, "I doan thin that word means what you t’ink it means." I refer to your use of the word "corrupt" which seems to have gone the way of Fascist, Communist, and Socialist which to many simply means, "I don’t agree with this person, nor do I like this person, basically because I don’t agree with them, so I want to attach a nasty, nasty name to this person...." Or as Jane Glat says, I believe, "I disagree with my opponent’s stand on tax policy, therefore my opponent has sex with goats."

Would you care to provide examples of "Corruption", which I take to mean the issuance of bids, contracts and favours for the acceptance of gifts of money, good or services? Do be careful with Haliburton, though, as Haliburton won the same sort of no-bid contracts under the Clinton Administration as it has received under the Bush Administration. Which makes a nice segue to the Clinton Administration... so Bush is more corrupt than the pair of ne’er do wells from Arkansas? OK, Castle Grande and the cattle futures deals sure look shady to me, but what the hey!

Bottom-line: I see you using "corrupt" to mean "behaving in ways of which I don’t approve," not as in "You can have the contract, but only IF you hire Jenna."

As to Karl Rove and Nasty Politics, again please explain? I’m taking that to mean that he helped get Bush elected and beat helped AlGore and then John Kerry, who if memory serves served in Vietnam. Again Nasty Politics would seem to mean those politics with which YOU disagree or the results of which you oppose.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe, how could you be so ignorant? Rove is corrupt because he fights the leftist vision of peace-by-apologizing-to-the-world-for-our-sins-and-giving-them-whatever-they-ask-in-reparations, live-in-perfect-harmony-with-nature-and-use-no-oil environmentalism, vegetarian-lifestyle-with-no-animal-abuse, free-wonderful-healthcare-for-all-just-like-in-Cuba, guaranteed-income-so-everyone-has-the-dignity-of-a-job heaven on Earth.

And he does it just because he’s a mean old Nazi. He hates everybody and just wants to wield his dark powers over the nation. He’s probably Voldemort in disguise. Or a reptilian alien wearing a mask.

And his mind-control rays are the only thing keeping him from being indicted.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
Oh, yea, Turd Blossom is nice & honest. Iraq is going smoothly, Chimpy is popular, the Republican led congress is not involved with any felonious corruption crimes.

Blow me. Turd Blossom is about to be introduced to his new room-mates, Jesus & Tyrone.

 
Written By: YuckFoo
URL: http://
Blow me.
I don’t believe we have too ... you appear to be a self-made man.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
It’s interesting that Truthout.org what stick its neck on the line for the "Rove Indictment" story, yet is still very timid and week when it comes to outing the "truth" on 9/11.

No, I am not one of those so-called "conspiracy theorist". The facts here are clear and incontrivertible:

1) WTC 7 was an obvious controlled demolition.
2) There was a stand down of the military on 9/11
3) The president was left exposed and unprotected by the Secret Service.

Do the math: INSIDE JOB.

Report on that "truthout.org" and perhaps you can regain some of your lost credibility.

 
Written By: Star
URL: http://www.starandbucwild.com
No, I am not one of those so-called "conspiracy theorist".
If something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.

And if something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, but claims it’s a swan, then it’s a lying duck.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
If it was an inside job, they should have done us all a favor and hit the UN instead of the World Trade Center. A lot less "innocent" people would have died.
 
Written By: Wilky
URL: http://
Do the math: INSIDE JOB.
Do the math: NUTJOB
 
Written By: Jordan
URL: http://
The world is only better when you’re told off by someone going under the handle of "YuckFoo"
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Oh, yea, Turd Blossom is nice & honest. Iraq is going smoothly, Chimpy is popular, the Republican led congress is not involved with any felonious corruption crimes.
Ah well as we agree then there is no cause for argument is there? The "Blow me" was the ultimate mental jujitsu, I must admit, leaving me defenselss and in awe of your forensic skills. I will have to remember it so as to use it at my next debate society meeting...
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
WTC 7 was an obvious controlled demolition.
And it’s obvious that you haven’t done even a modicum of research into what preparations would have been required to create such a controlled demolition.

And that doesn’t even mention the fact that such a well-hidden controlled demolition could have been touted as a terrorist attack without having to dick around with the airplanes in the first place.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Nobody claimed to be predicting the future...they claimed an existing fact that hasn’t yet been demonstrated. A woman often knows she’s pregnant before anyone else does. Sometimes she says something to someone, sometimes she doesn’t. That doesn’t change the fact that she’s pregnant. Time eventually makes it obvious, but she was pregnant long before then.
Maybe a more apt analogy would be Shroedinger’s Indictment.
 
Written By: equitus
URL: http://
A more apt quote for my Shroedinger’s Indictment gag would have been this
Uh, Derek, it’s not a "fact" until it is "demonstrated".
 
Written By: equitus
URL: http://
Hey, this ’getting out in front of the news cycle’ thing has some potential. I could embezzle millions from my employer, then defend myself with the claim that I was just ’getting out in front of the salary cycle.’
 
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://quantum-sky.net
This is hilarious. So many lefties going spontaneously insane.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
I think this is also a good case study on how things such as "facts" come to be among BDS sufferers (as I’ve defined them for myself in previous comments). It’s been reported that Rove was finally indicted, so this now goes into the library of "facts" that the left will use in the future to bash Bush.

That this was never reported by more mainstream outlets won’t get in the way of their holding this as true.

Very interesting to watch these thought processes in action.
 
Written By: equitus
URL: http://
This stupid thread re-proves the fact that we are ALL arguing national politics with supposed facts, yet actually just spewing the same ídiotic partisan nonsense. What needs to happen for Bush lovers to admit that this administration has done something wrong? Or, that they’re taking this country (and world) in the wrong direction. The argument that Clinton or other politicians are equally corrupt doesn’t work — you’re bringing your hero down to the lowest common denominator. We deserve, and should expect, better.

What has Bush ever done that was postive for us? I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican — I prefer to vote based on results, rather than loyalty. But, across the board, Bush has been a disaster for this country. Nothing he’s said he’d do has worked. The war on terror has never been proved to do anything except further inflame the world against our country. When you defend this administration on the basis of semantics, spelling, or ideology that flies in the face of reality — you sound desperate and pathetic. Let’s be honest, this is an administration that has less regard for the world population than their own self-serving interests and debunked theories on nation-building. The thing that should really upset us — have they been honest about it? Regarding foreign policy, EVERYTHING they have said has turned out to be untrue or just plain hasn’t materialized. How many more chances do you think we should give them?

If you think this post is unrelated to those that came before, you’re the reason we’re consistantly stuck with politicians who do NOT represent us nor fear the power of the public. Connect the dots.
 
Written By: Felonious Thunk
URL: http://
What needs to happen for Bush lovers to admit that this administration has done something wrong?

...

What has Bush ever done that was postive for us?
What needs to happen before BDS sufferers admit that not everything Bush does is evil, wrong, disastrous, etc.?

Look, I’ve slammed the guy myself, for example, here. But the problem with discussing things with folks like you is that you insist that every single thing the guy does is wrong. And that’s simply preposterous. The economy has done reasonably well, especially considering the 9/11 shock. You can prat on about nation-building being "debunked" but I’ll bet you would find a lot of Afghans that disagree. Bush has gotten two people on the Supreme Court that I’m willing to live with - certainly better than Ginsberg, who apparently believes that France should have as much authority over our laws as we do (while conveniently disallowing the reverse).

True, the guy does many things wrong. I think he was cowardly to sign McCain-Feingold. His stance on immigration is the worst kind of wishful thinking. Etc. Etc. But BDS sufferers like you can’t see anything but mistakes and bumbling. And anyone with any connection to reality ought to realize that the world simply doesn’t work that way. A man who was half as incompetent as you say Bush is (such as, for example, Jimmy Carter) would never have been re-elected, even against a stuffed shirt like Kerry.

So come back to Earth here. You might start by clarifying this "I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican" stuff. Tally up the last ten years or so and see how many of each you’ve voted for. While I obviously can’t know, based on your rhetoric, I suspect the D votes outnumber the R votes by a fair stretch.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
Billy Hollis,

You’re absolutely right — the first presidential election I voted for was Bush I vs. Dukakis. So, I’ve voted Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry. That’s a lot of D. But, it doesn’t tell the whole story. I’ve given both sides a chance in each race and I’d vote Republican in a second, if I felt their candidate was better. The problem is the Republican party has decided to focus on a platform of enticing their base — and turning off anyone who doesn’t care either way about flag burning and gay marriage.

I never said everything Bush does is wrong. I’m hardly informed enough to be able to rate every decision he’s made. I’m saying — look at his results. In the big picture, what can you point to as a wholehearted success? Please, name me a few... surprisingly, you failed to mention any concrete examples but felt compelled to call me a name or two.

The only "successes" I can name fall into the category of politics for politics sake. I can see through this recent immigration nonsense, for example — does anybody think he actually cares? Isn’t it more likely this is an attempt to shore up his base and help assist fellow republicans in november? Otherwise, I agree with him on the issue of assimilation — I don’t think immigrants should be punished or pushed out — the vast, vast majority of immigrants, legal or not, want to add to our society and be a part of it, not detract from it or undermine us. But, he has to deal with that base that helped elect him — people still thinking the japanese are trying to steal all of our auto-industry jobs. So, his opinions that I actually agree with — are generally those that anger the people that matter to him most.

You want to talk about the economy? You’re in a tough spot — he came in as president when the country had a budget surplus — 6 years later, no one would have known it. We’re back where we started, with people around the world MORE angry at us, the world no safer than when we started. The economy is hardly sound nor safe — and far worse than it was under a Democratic president — how could it be! I just don’t feel we’ve gotten back what we’ve paid for.

If you disagree with someone, you shouldn’t try to pigeonhole them into a category — BDS sufferer, or whatever. You’re deluding yourself and closing yourself off to contrary opinions. The question you should be asking yourself is, why do you jump to defend bush more often than you question him? If you’re going to reply saying you’re unbiased — take a look at your actual thoughts and posts relating to Bush. Judging from your rethoric, I’m guessing it’s more supportive of Bush than not.

MP
 
Written By: Felonious Thunk
URL: http://
Felonius Thunk invokes the "wizard of oz" defense for Jason Leopold and truthout. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!! I am the great and powerful speaker of truth to Power!!!

Come on man, the thread was about the fact that Truthout, Ash and Leopold got caught looking like idiots because they went out on a big limb without facts or evidence. So rather than accusing people here of being fawning bush bots, how about talking about the thread’s point.

 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Sounds like you want to have it both ways. First:
What has Bush ever done that was postive for us?
Then later:
I never said everything Bush does is wrong.
I don’t see any other implication. If he’s done nothing positive in your eyes, then presumably everything he’s done is wrong (or at best, inconsequential). Make up your mind, here.

And then you really go off in the weeds with this:
The problem is the Republican party has decided to focus on a platform of enticing their base — and turning off anyone who doesn’t care either way about flag burning and gay marriage.
Enticing the base? The GOP under Bush? As I talked about in the article I referenced earlier, Bush has gone against the base far more often than he’s gone with it. It’s to the point that many Republicans are seriously worried about the base sitting out 2006. He’s screwed the base on McCain-Feingold, Medicare Rx, Kennedy’s education bill, plus an attempt with the Miers nomination...

If that’s your idea of what’s really going on in American politics, I really don’t know what areas we can discuss. Consider it name calling if you like, but making assertions like that demonstrates a rather serious detachment from the real world.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
Oh Des, Thunk, Ash et al, by the way, Karl sends his regards

Some seriously harshed mellow on the left side of the bolgosphere this week.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Someone find a lawyer.
The answer likely is that an indictment does not HAVE to be announced and can be sealed until the legal body creating it decides to announce it.
Rove may not even have the option of confirming or denying it.
Stranger animals than this exist in our legal system, such as being required to answer any question on any topic when compelled to appear under oath before a grand jury.
Nope, you can’t call this a lie until the investigation is completed, shut down and the full records are released - meaning never.
 
Written By: Carl Sandberg
URL: http://
What needs to happen for Bush lovers to admit that this administration has done something wrong?
What has Bush ever done that was postive for us? I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican — I prefer to vote based on results, rather than loyalty. But, across the board, Bush has been a disaster for this country. Nothing he’s said he’d do has worked. The war on terror has never been proved to do anything except further inflame the world against our country. When you defend this administration on the basis of semantics, spelling, or ideology that flies in the face of reality — you sound desperate and pathetic. Let’s be honest, this is an administration that has less regard for the world population than their own self-serving interests and debunked theories on nation-building. The thing that should really upset us — have they been honest about it? Regarding foreign policy, EVERYTHING they have said has turned out to be untrue or just plain hasn’t materialized. How many more chances do you think we should give them
So why should I even bother in the face of this? I guess you deserve credit for your restraint in not calling him Hitler...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Ooh. Looky-there! Another successful, fake media-wave has cascaded across the ’sphere.

Guys, Newsweek hyped urine-splashed Koran’s to sell copy, and the NYT rehashed Truman’s domestic intelligence-gathering apparatus to boost its ad-sales.

The fake "Rove indictment" story was ginned up just to build page-view stats for its author’s publication. It was designed to garner your eyeballs, advertiser attention, and your avid comments. Truth never entered into it.

And this particular media-impulse is still propagating page-views for its generators. (How many of you have clicked on the lefty site again just to read his lame "apology?")




 
Written By: grass
URL: http://
The fake "Rove indictment" story was ginned up just to build page-view stats
Actually, it was ginned up because Joe Wilson and Ray McGovern were stymied by what they saw was the slow progress of Fitz’s investigation. They figured that they could force Fitz’s hand if they got a big enough blogswarm on it. It didn’t and now we are laughing. As it should be. ;)
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Nope, you can’t call this a lie until the investigation is completed, shut down and the full records are released
So, he could be indicted but no one ever finds out about it.

Oooo kay
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
"You want to talk about the economy? You’re in a tough spot — he came in as president when the country had a budget surplus — 6 years later, no one would have known it."

The debt went up each year:
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34

This does not equal a surplus, at least not with out "creative" accounting practices.
 
Written By: Anonymous
URL: http://
"come to be among BDS sufferers (as I’ve defined them for myself in previous comments)."

Don’t look now, but by every public health defintion it appears "BDS" is a pandemic.
 
Written By: Davebo
URL: http://
Don’t look now, but by every public health defintion it appears "BDS" is a pandemic.
That’s what the Center for the Study of Political Diseases says.

And for the humor-impaired, yes, it’s a joke.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://

1. Advocacy of torture.
2. Abandonment of Geneva Conventions.

Those are war crimes. Bush, Cheney and Gonzalez are war criminals.

3. Denying prisoners access to legal counsel.
4. Wiretapping without warrants.

Those are violations of the US Constitution, and possibly constitute crimes against humanity.

5. Refusal to negotiate with the Taliban.
6. Refusal to negotiate with Saddam Hussein.
7. Refusal to negotiate with the govt of Iran.

In my opinion, those are acts of apalling incompetence.

So, Bush is a war criminal, a violator of constitutional rights of individuals, and incompetent.

db

 
Written By: spicetrader
URL: http://spicetrader.net
1. Advocacy of torture.
2. Abandonment of Geneva Conventions.
Nope sorry didn’t happen... they did allow tough interrogation, but the whole "torture memo" thing was about defining what was or WAS NOT torture, unless of course you’re from the crew that says asking them anything is coercive. As to the Conventions, THEY DON’T APPLY TO THE FOLKS IN GITMO, they’re "Unlawful combatants". Geneav only applies to lawful combatants.
3. Denying prisoners access to legal counsel.
4. Wiretapping without warrants.
Dude 600,000 German and Italian PoW’s were denied legal counsel int he Second World War in this country! BECAUSE BEING A POW ISN’T A CRIME! THEY DON’T GET LEGAL COUNSEL. They are unlawful combatants, that’s they’re only crime! They are hwever, COMBATANTS, and until the war is over, well they can be held. You might recall the PoW’s returning from Vietnam? They were denied legal counsel, too, but then they didn’t need it... they were returned when the hostilities ended.

You don’t need a warrant to tap calls and communications ORIGINATING FROM OUTSIDE THE US.
Those are violations of the US Constitution, and possibly constitute crimes against humanity.
So I guess not. Oh and could you please point out to me the treaty that requires warrants, as to the Conventions I believe I pointed out the problem with your premise.
5. Refusal to negotiate with the Taliban.
6. Refusal to negotiate with Saddam Hussein.
7. Refusal to negotiate with the govt of Iran.
Yeah, but WE DID... FRUITLESSLY, you must have missed that. Busy at a "rave" or something no doubt. Let’s see tried to get the Taliban to "cough up" UBL, no dice.

Tried to bring Hussein into compliance with UN Resolutions, took months, most of 2002 was given over to maneuvering thru the UN Security Council. Again to no avail.

HAVE YOU JUST GOTTEN YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION, as we speak we ARE STILL NEGOTIATING WITH IRAN.

What you mean by negotiate is that we talk, and talk, and talk, and talk, and talk, and talk, and talk, and talk,... eventually nothing happens. We talk some more, is that you’re idea of negotiations? We made clear what the conditions for war/non-war were to both Hussein and the Taliban. They chose to ignore those conditions. Negotiation is NOT AN END IN ITSELF, it’s a means to an end! When the negotiations fail to produce the necessary ends, other methods must be tried!

We didn’t negotiate with Slobodan Milosovic EITHER, Spicetrader, not by YOUR definition... was that also act of colossal incompetence? I guess FDR and Truman were ALSO incompetent when they failed to negotiate witht he Axis Powers and then North Korea?
So, Bush is a war criminal, a violator of constitutional rights of individuals, and incompetent.
Or alternatively, "Bush is someone whom I detest and did not vote for and therefore am determined to say NOTHING good about. Even if I have to ignore recent history or the legal facts on the ground."


 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
I know Truthout goes out on a lot of limbs, but I think they should be given credit for admitting when they’ve made a mistake. If only all news outlets (on all sides) were willing to do the same.
 
Written By: JenBeee
URL: http://
I find it rather interesting that people are willing to take the word of those with a track record of lies, as gospel truth. The current admisnitration is possibility the most corrupt in history and Rove is the professor emeritus of Nasty Politics 101. How can anyone possibly believe the denials coming from this camp now?
It’s funny, but when I read the first sentence, I assumed he was talking about Truthout, and in particular Jason Leopold, since that description fits the latter perfectly.
 
Written By: David Nieporent
URL: http://www.oobleck.com/tollbooth
I know Truthout goes out on a lot of limbs, but I think they should be given credit for admitting when they’ve made a mistake. If only all news outlets (on all sides) were willing to do the same.
If only. But what Truthout actually did was not "admit when they’ve made a mistake" at all. They issued a partial apology (whatever that odd concoction is) — not for getting the story wrong, but for "getting too far out in front of the news cycle."

I think what that means is, "We still insist Karl Rove is going to be indicted, but it hasn’t happened yet." Unfortunately, the story they printed said it had happened... which makes it false, not "ahead of" anything.
 
Written By: David Nieporent
URL: http://www.oobleck.com/tollbooth
Jason Leapold is generally right on the ball.... but he blew it on this one.... and it was a big one.

Truthout has egg on it’s face as they should... It was a major dissapointment for many of to hear that Rove was not indicted.
 
Written By: John Wilson
URL: http://
hmmm, could it be that Rove has been indicted, but it’s sealed - and maybe he has turned state’s evidence to save himself? hmmm, just guessing. but maybe Truthout isn’t far off the mark. a "partial apology" for a partial mistake.
 
Written By: mary
URL: http://
Whether or not Rove is indicted will have little lasting effect on what’s really gone wrong with things. I hope the little pig is soon exposed for all the damage he’s done, but any satisfaction gained from this much anticipated event would be short lived...the bigger picture is what matters, period. Until we figure out how to look beyond the appearance of things and treat each other with dignity and accept our differences as part of the human condition, until we learn how to honor and nurture the only home we have (Mother Earth), until we stop living firmly anchored in the material world while our true essence whithers away...well I guess we’re screwed! All the political and intellectual rhetoric in the world means nothing without taking action in some positive direction, i.e., get off your burgeoning butts and find out what’s really going on with your fellow man...it’s simply a matter of truly listening and applying a modicum of empathy in return...if we all did this, much of this world’s man-made strife would evaporate. Of course, what would all you supposed intellectuals have to wax philisophical about in that event, how would you fill up your empty days???
 
Written By: newton
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider