-
Sponsors
Mar
21
The Real Reason Rove Can’t Testify Under Oath: Bible Burns
March 21, 2007 |
The president does not want Carl Rove to testify to Congress under oath. It’s widely assumed that this is to avoid risking perjury. But the real reason Carl Rove can’t take an oath is much simpler.
It’s because taking an oath involves touching a bible, and he cannot safely do so without incurring second- or third-degree burns.
Bush, the devout Christian, understands this. And with his well-documented penchant for compassion and empathy, he simply refuses to put another human being in harm’s way to serve his purposes.
The press reports that Bush’s “compromise” would involve Rove speaking off the record to the Congressional committee. But that’s just the broad strokes.
In reality, the president’s compromise spells out in specific language, just how far away from a bible Rove must be at any given time, as well as what kind of protective clothing he is to be given, how often the word “bible” can be used in his presence, and what protocols should be followed if he happens to see a quote from the bible on his way into or out of the building. It’s more or less a Bible Restraining Order.
It’s not that the president doesn’t want the truth to come out, it’s just an extraordinary picture of how far President Bush is willing to go to keep another American safe.
And these kinds of precautions are not new to the Bush Administration. For example, it was widely reported that former Attorney General John Ashcroft held daily prayer meetings at the DOJ. But what’s not well known is that for these prayer meetings, the bible had to literally be teleconferenced in from a safe location. Ashcroft himself couldn’t look at the screen. But an intern from Bob Jones University would look at the screen and then paraphrase the relevant passages. It took a tremendous amount of coordination and expense. But no one disputes it was worth it.
And of course, the biggest hero in all this is Vice President Dick Cheney. Bush has begged him to take precautions against Bible Burns. But this brave man’s man strolls into the White House each and every day, wearing no Haz-Mat suit, no asbestos gloves, no welder’s helmet or anything. The press will tell you about his “heart condition,” but the truth is, Dick Cheney is being slowly burned alive from the inside by the bible across the hall in the Oval Office. An extraordinary sacrifice.
Comments
18 Comments so far
So when President Clinton fired all ninety-plus U.S. Attorneys upon ascension to office, that was okay? Not political at all?
No, it’s only bad when Repubs do it, right?
Why should Presidential staffers have to trot over to a hostile congress and testify under oath every time they feel like digging perjury bait for their next partisan fishing expedition? The constitution regards all three branches of government as equal, meaning none is subordinate to the other. And if all the Dems want is information (as they say), why do they insist it has to be collected under oath anyway? Any guesses?
Something happens to you Libs whenever you think of Karl Rove - does your vision cloud with rage, does it go red? Do you froth?
But the Bible joke was cute, have to give you that.
It’s customary for a president to fire all US Attorneys en masse at the beginning of his term. This removes any suspicion that the president is trying to obstruct justice in any specific cases.
Bush fired seven US Attorneys, all of whom were either pursuing corruption cases against Republicans, or were being pressured to move faster to pursue voter fraud cases against Democrats.
Not to mention, six of the seven had received glowing reviews by the administration up until that point.
Maybe there’s no wrongdoing here. But I can assure you, if Clinton had done it, you would have demanded a congressional investigation, and you would have been right to do so.
As for the “hostile congress,” it happens to be the United States Congress. I don’t think certain congresses have less relevance than others.
But thanks for the props on the bible joke. I like your site as well, and my vote is for the Harrison Ford hair.
It’s thin gruel my friend. These people have always served at the pleasure of the President - he can fire one on tuesday because he doesn’t like his hair and then launch another dozen on friday because because their last names all begin with the letter “P”.
As for the custom of replacing U.S. Attorneys, why do Presidents do that? They do it because they want THEIR people in. It is a political decision, and that’s ok.
Oh wait, there’s a new Geico Caveman ad on…gotta love that guy…he’s so uptight.
OK back. recognizing the simple fact that the Congress is hostile is not a comment on its relevance, it’s a comment on that particular legislative body’s motivations. They got nothing better to do than THIS? Please. Playing up this non-scandal is yet another game of partisan “Gotcha”. Remember the theory that Valerie Plame was “Outed” by the adminstration as payback? Turned out to be Armitage didn’t it? Another non-scandal, but the lesson was learned: subpoenaed testimony can get you nailed.
Ken Burns lives near The Beast Den here in New Hampshire - we are all very proud of him, and fellow residents Mark Steyn and even Dan Brown (sometimes). Your parody was truly hilarious - did Burns ever comment on it?
Harrison Ford huh? That’s probably closest to what The Beast’s real hair looked like back in the hoary mists of antiquity when he actually had some.
You guys afraid to play a few rounds of Partisan Gotcha? For some reason, I now have a ton of energy for the game;)
I heard from someone at PBS that the link made the rounds there and that Ken Burns saw it and was amused. I also heard from someone who works for Ken’s brother Ric, who said Ric couldn’t get enough of it and was showing it to everyone he knows.
Defense is not as much fun as offense, granted. Still, one has to wonder if the new Dem majority was elected to spend all their time passing toothless nonbinding resolutions and holding hearings on specious partisan, non-issues. The foamy nutroots may love that but the rest of the nation may actually expect some real statesmanship eventually. Repubs should have learned that hard lesson in the 90’s, but they didn’t take it to heart.
Think of the Beast as the political version of Marley’s Ghost: he and his party bears the chains he forged in life.
I would like to take a moment to speak out against dim-witted publishers of hate literature. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I help others to see through the empty and meaningless statements uttered by Mr. T. H. Beast and his faithfuls. He is the hidden hand behind all modern cataclysms. At the risk of sounding a tad redundant, let me add that the next time he decides to support hostile governments known for human rights abuses, wrongful imprisonment, and slavery, he should think to himself, cui bono? — who benefits? I want nothing more — or less — than to get my message about Mr. Beast out to the world. To that task I have consecrated my life, and I invite you to do likewise. For the sake of concreteness, in his helpers, we can recognize the symptoms of decay of a slowly rotting world. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true.
Not to be rude or anything, but I by no means claim to know everything about grungy sadistic-types. I mean, think about it. Note that T. H. Beast’s publicity stunts have grown into a deluded tapestry weaving together classical conspiracy theories of the 19th century and post-Marxian economics. But there’s the rub; I enjoy the great diversity of humankind, in our food, our dress, our music, our literature, and our forms of spiritual expression. What I don’t enjoy are Beast’s closed-minded, predatory revenge fantasies which deny minorities a cultural voice. I would never take a job working for Mr. Beast. Given his brainless memoranda, who would want to?
There’s a lot of talk nowadays about Beast’s dastardly slurs but not much action. And if you think that The Hairy Beast’s off-the-cuff comments won’t be used for political retribution, then you aren’t thinking very clearly. For what it’s worth, Beast is not as unpleasant or pesky as you might think. He’s more so. What is the most appropriate way to break the mold and stray from the path of conventional wisdom? Education — the real thing, not the fatuitous facsimile that Hairy Beast promotes in order to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating. Many of our problems would be solved if only more people were educated to learn that I don’t want to build castles in the air. I don’t want to plan things that I can’t yet implement. But I do want to solve the problems of nepotism, prætorianism, economic inequality, and lack of equal opportunity because doing so clearly demonstrates how either he has no real conception of the sweep of history, or he is merely intent on winning some debating pin by trying to pierce a hole in my logic with “facts” that are taken out of context. In short, I feel we must provide you with a holistic and thematic history of The Hairy Beast’s contentious tractates. I hope other members of the community feel the same.
Huh?
Lol - yeah, completely lost here too.
Whoever this Mr. Beast is, he sound like one badass character.
Chuckle.
Mr. Chuckle,
I have never aspired to become a speechwriter, politician, or mainstream political columnist. Nevertheless, if you can look beyond my pitiable writing style you’ll surely see that I have something important to tell you about Mr.The Hairy Beast (THB for the sake of brevity). To plunge right into it, THB frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what THB is doing — as opposed to what he is saying — to understand his true aims. He says that he is known for his sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends. Should we care that large numbers of pathetic, venom-spouting blatherskites actually believe such blockish things? Should we try to convince them otherwise? I don’t think so. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that his paroxysms manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: construct the spectre of a terrible armed threat. Phase two: do the entire country a grave disservice.
MTHB once heard a mutinous paranoiac say, “Truth is merely a social construct.” What’s amazing is that THB was then able to use that single quotation plus some anecdotal evidence to convince his dupes that clever one-liners are a valid substitute for actual thinking, which undoubtedly makes me wonder, “What is his secret agenda?” My best guess, for what it may be worth, is based on two key observations. The first observation is that I must search for solutions that are more creative and constructive than the typically namby-pamby ones championed by what I call petty, hectoring fogeys if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by cacodemonic perverts (especially the stinking type). The second, more telling, observation is that The Hairy Beast’s attempts to promote a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk are much worse than mere scapegoatism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation.
Dr. Price:
At first, I thought you were insane or drunk, but now I think I know what you are. You are some kind of spam-bot created by conservative operatives (probably Rove, I figure), which randomly posts liberal-sounding gibberish in a fiendish attempt to dilute any other liberal arguments. Well I’m onto you, Rove. Well played.
Au contraire - he’s definitely not one of ours.
This nut’s fallen from your tree, hehe.
Mr. Well Played,
I know surprisingly little about Mr. Karl Rove. I know nothing about his background or lineage. I do not know where Rove was educated or what he has done besides break down traditional values. Nevertheless, I can tell you all that you need to know about him. Here’s a quick review: The only weapons he has in his intellectual arsenal are book burning, brainwashing, and intimidation. That’s all he has, and heend subroutine{null pointer error}…..reboot/././././././././/nsa.priority.1(gold)…1.01.045.001//./././././.reset defaults…010110110001100111010110/////boot failure……real time clock error…….mandatory shut-down/./././deleting…\Bobrow\ Andrew\ Morton\…/./././././sanitizing FAT…………breaking link
My little sister used to cry when confronted with green beans at supper. She was a piker compared to you quizling lefties, spilling your emotional trauma over things you know nothing about. It is easy to judge the actions of a busy person who is making difficult decisions on the bow wave of the moment. That is what Presidents do, and the Congress is to “Advise and Consent”. I, also, was a political idiot in my youth, but exposure to the political process has softened my left edge. Study hard to find something wrong, and you will be gratified by discovery of a lot garbage, with which you will be able to build another empty case.
Actually it sounds like you’re the one crying here. As in, “Boo hoo, why are you mean liberals picking on my brave brave daddy? Don’t you know how super important he is?”
And as for “Congress is to Advise and Consent,” are you suggesting that the Clinton impeachment hearing was unconstitutional? Or the Watergate hearings?
Heya Andy,
I loved this short!
But what about Rove justifies implicating him as an evil person? I’ve never understood this fascination that democrats have with Rove. If you’ve got a problem with Bush, then go after Bush. Why focus on Rove?
Anyway, in order for humor to work, as I’m sure you know, it has to have a grain of truth. I don’t see the grain here. What about Rove constitutes “evil”? Please enlighten me.
It would seem that the methodology that Karl Rove promoted, for American conservatives to attack liberals (as a form of patriotism)is no longer working. I lean to the left but I understand it is important to have good arguments coming from the left and right. Karl Rove eliminated the interlectual arguments of the Republicans. A good citizen, left or right would agree that this is a bad thing. Good policy can come from either side.
Australia and England are now leaving the US alliance because the last seven years have been a disaster supporting American policy. Bush is giving 22billion in weapon systems to Israel, Egypt & the Saudi Kingdom. The UK & Australia joined 7 years ago to hunt and remove weapons from Iraq (not shove more weapons into the middle east)
PS You can only be an “Allies” if you fight on the same team as England. In the American war of independence America belonged to Napoleon’s “Axis”. If England, the EEC and Russia boycot the USA over emissions then American will be part of the Axis again!
did you over the 24th chapter the day time or just in mind or a dream
I totally agree with Rachel Villegas. Rovenator isn’t evil, only programmed to improperly prioritize Republican American dogma over ethics and fate of humanity in general. See the 24th chapter. Please provide any response by answering this poll: “Rove is evil”, “Rove is unethical”, “Deny Rove is bad because I hate minorities and other gay types”, “Do not understand why people don’t like being ruled by Rove”, “If you are creeped out by Rove you must be a nut_____” (Select one: “nutcase”, “nutbag”, “nutball”, “nutroot”, “why isn’t there a choice for “moon____”? (Select one: “moonbat”, “moonnut”, “moonfruit”, “moonpod”, “[insert your own moon or nut themed aspersion]“)). Funny stuff Mr. Bobrow, thank you.