Ah, but if you've read Freud, you'll know that Wes' little joke has to have a hidden meeting. My guess: since it is widely known that the General is a metrosexual, I'll go a step further and say that he's rocking back and forth next to his phone, just waiting for that cute Karl to call. That's right, Wes isn't just a metrosexual, he's a homosexual. If that sonofabitch Clinton hadn't told us not to ask and not to tell, we wouldn't have queeries like Clark as Supreme Commander of NATO. My guess is that Wes probably wants to destroy the sacred institution of marriage, too. I mean why else would he call Karl?

Give old Emmett a break..it's difficult for him and his fellow rightie pundits to remain perpetually offended and outraged week after week after week while simultaneously crowing about the death of liberalism.

Plus, it's improper grammar. It should be "his willingness to terrorize his own self."

I'm sure the right wing pundits will sway plenty of voters by attacking Dean's dead brother.

no....he doesn't understand anything.

Oh so Clark did announce in September and his aide lied. No big deal except in establishing a pattern.

Messaging Newsweek by BlackBerry, Clark late last week insisted the remark was a "humorous tweak." The two others said it was anything but. "He went into detail about his grievances," Holtzman said. "Clark wasn't joking. We were really shocked."

The two others being the Governor of Colorado and the president of Denver University.

I know of no axe these guys have to grind with Clark.
What about Clarks mystery phone call he received from the white house on 9/11? Guess that was a joke too, this guy is a real comedian.

I don't think republicans will trash Deans brother, but they will probably trash Dean for lying. I guess Dean was hoping that everyone would assume that his brother died in combat in Laos? Mystifying.

Good work Jesse your really on to something here.

Mark, what the hell are you talking about? Or is this another salvo from the "make shit up" brigade?

Two Republicans swear up and down Clark called Rove, Clark says he didn't and was joking around, the phone records bear out what Clark is saying...so obviously, that means Clark lied.

It's beyond idiotic, and your lying about it *really* doesn't help. You've mangled the Dean situation so horribly that it only bears a resemblance to reality if you showed it to an alcoholic round about 12:15 last night.

it has long been suspected that Charlie Dean may have been working for the CIA. The Communists were apparently working off of that assumption, anyway, since it would have been much more profitable for them to try to ransom him if he was just some dumb kid.

...is this another salvo from the "make shit up" brigade?

Bingo. Except a lot of brownshirt lying in the New Year.

Sorry, that's "expect"...

"Two Republicans swear up and down Clark called Rove, Clark says he didn't and was joking around, the phone records bear out what Clark is saying...so obviously, that means Clark lied."

Jesse if you have a problem with comprehension I can refer you to a good tutor at some Ivy named Karl.

Wrong two Republicans are not saying Clark called Rove. Clark said he called Rove. Clark told the gov. of colorado and the pres. of denver univ. that he was considering becoming a republican, and that if Rove would have returned his calls...... This was a remark made in the context of disparinging his party. Joke? If it were true it would be midly funny, either way why would you defend it?

Oh yeah I forgot the gov. is a liar, the pres. of denver U. is a liar, Im a liar.
I guess Clark is the only one telling the truth.

"Liars, liars, you are all just a bunch of liars."

Ladies and gentleman, your democratic party.

Not sure how I messed the Dean lie up, but Im sure someone will tell me.

Diving into my bunker now.

Wrong two Republicans are not saying Clark called Rove. Clark said he called Rove. Clark told the gov. of colorado and the pres. of denver univ. that he was considering becoming a republican, and that if Rove would have returned his calls...... This was a remark made in the context of disparinging his party. Joke? If it were true it would be midly funny, either way why would you defend it?

It's amazing what you can cling to when you simply ignore what other people say in favor of sticking to a narrow and erroneous interpretation of matters.

Simple question: Clark says it was a joke, and that he never called. Two Republicans say it was for real, and that he was pissed about Rove not calling him. HE NEVER CALLED KARL ROVE, and the White House phone logs PROVE IT. Therefore, whose account of what happened jibes with the facts at hand, and who seems like they're unveiling a convenient partisan spin? It's already well-documented that you can't joke with a conservative, because they're literalistic and have no sense of humor (see: Al Gore's Union song joke), but it just makes you look incredibly silly and ignorant to push this.

With regards to the Dean issue, check when the survey was actually taking and Dean's legitimate rationale for including the part about his brother - i.e., actually investigate the issue at hand rather than finding a handy spin point and waving it around ineffectually.

It's telling that the only way you can argue is by skimming over the facts and using awful logic. Seems to happen a lot to you...

The Republican Party: everyone keeps pointing out that our lies are lies!

Bananahead,

Whether he called or didnt call isnt the point, or at least not the most important point. If Clark can't dismiss the entire conversation as a "joke" the part about calling Rove is the least of his worries. Im saying I believe the conversation took place and that Clark wasnt joking around regardless if he made the phone calls or not. The important lie is that HE WASNT JOKING.

As for Dean, you think the questionaire that he lied on was the appropriate venue to start spouting off about his brother. Dont answer, Im sure you will say yes.

Irretreivably moronic.

By the way the question was "Who is your closest living relative in the military?" Even though Deans brother was classified as MIA by our government, Dean didn't bother to point out that his brother wasnt in the military.

Whatever

Mark:

1) If Clark was really being serious when he said "I might have become a Republican if Karl Rove had returned my calls," then he must have called Karl Rove and waited for a return call.
2) Clark didn't call Karl Rove.
3) Therefore, Clark wasn't being serious when he said "I might have become a Republican if Karl Rove had returned my calls," no matter what the governor of Colorado thought.

See the point?

Let me break this down piece by piece.

1) Clark has a conversation with the Gov. of Colorado and the Pres. of Denver. True or False? I say true.

2) During the conversation Clark starts complaining about his party. True or False? I say true.

3) Clark says he almost became a republican if only Rove had returned his calls. True or False? I say true.

4) The Gov. and the Pres. of Denver U. don't get the impression that Clark is joking around. True or False? I say true.

5) Clark actually made the phone calls. True or False. False the records prove he didnt.

Now unless the Gov. and the Univ pres. are lying, pinnochio Clark has a ten foot nose.

The first lie is telling the Gov. and Univ. Pres. that he almost became a Republican. (dumb lie #1)

The second lie is telling the two republicans that he made the phone calls. (pathological, and idiotic I agree). Its like an Al Gore type lie, it really serves no purpose except maybe to give some creedence to his level of seriousness during his conversation with the Gov. and the Univ Pres.(dumb lie #2)

The third lie is telling a reporter that he was only joking around. What he should have said was "I wasnt joking, I was lying." (dumb lie #3)

The problem here is that you guys expect me to explain why clark would tell what can only be described as pathological idiotic lies. Sorry I cant do it.

The alternatives are: A) Clark was joking; or, B) Clark was telling a lie, a lie which served no possible purpose, which actually went against his own interests. The latter would indeed make Clark a "pathological" liar, because those are the kinds of lies pathological liars tell: not lies which get them out of trouble, but lies that get them into trouble. A pathological liar lies constantly, compulsively, and gratuitously; he can scarcely get through a conversation without one or two blatant lies.

Plainly then the correct answer is A): Clark was joking, because Clark is certainly not a "pathological" liar. If he were, that fact would have been glaringly evident by now. If Clark just couldn't help lying, there would be a list, several pages long, of Clark's most indisputable lies, garnered just from his last few interviews, circulated by all his political opponents. There would be an investigation of the United States Army to determine how a pathological liar -- one of the most dangerous men conceivable to be in command of armies! -- could possibly have been allowed to rise to Clark's rank.

So, in order to come to conclusion B), you need to jump to a wild conclusion which a moment's thinking would refute, on the basis of neglible evidence, and in the face of a perfectly plausible alternative conclusion. If you do this often enough, the only reasonable diagnosis for your case would be "pathological Republicanism."

Youre right, the third lie wasnt pathological, and of the 3 lies it was the least stupid.

There is a long list of lies told by Clark, some pathological, some not.

The democratic party: unless you have video and audio tape, ten eye witnesses, a signed confession and a declaration by god, it didnt happen.

The Republican Party - unless you can point out how my two contradictory facts contradict each other, and provide a Republican who said it, then everything makes sense.

Mark, you're sad. To say the least.

Jesse, you only respond when youre scared.

Nuff said.

How about something in between "a declaration by God" and "a declaration by a guy on an Internet forum"? Do you have anything like that, Mark?

Jesse, you only respond when youre scared.

Nuff said.

And you only respond when you're lying. Explains all the responses, don't it?