/* ------------------- begin IP Block script ------------------- Block IP address script Points to php script on blog.racetotheright.com IP addresses are within the script ---------- */ /* -------------------- end IP Block script ------------------- */

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Ethical decision making means blame goes elsewhere

--posted by Tony Garcia on 1/31/2006

(H/T: MDE)
Ethical decision making. That is what Coleen Rowley claims. Yesterday her website put up a doctored picture that gave the appearance of Rep. John Kline wearing a Nazi uniform.

Well, it seems that she has offered an apology and blamed it all on a volunteer.
Rowley had the photo removed from her website and took steps to apologize personally. She said an unpaid volunteer prepared the blog, and she approved it without making the Nazi connection.

Rather, she said she focused instead on the message that Kline, a retired Marine Corps colonel, was "incompetent" like Klink, a Nazi colonel easily fooled by his American prisoners in the TV series "Hogan's Heroes."
Just want you to understand what "ethical decision making" is to Rowley. She blames the picture depicting Kline as a Nazi on someone else even though she approved it. She should be given a pass because she was focused on the message...that Kline is like a Nazi and against fighting the KKK.

Yep, she has lost her mind...and officially fits in with the rest of the looney wing of the Democrat party. I repeat what I said yesterday about Rowley's "ethical decision making":
I am betting this is what you can expect to see from her campaign throughout the campaign AND after the election. I am putting a bet down that after her loss she will scream about voter fraud.
With every story and action that comes from the Rowley camp her credibility as anything less than a partisan hack...and an unethical one at that.
If this is her shining example of "ethical decision making" that she lives by it makes you wonder about everything that she said during her career. Maybe we should look with MUCH more skepticism at everything she said in her whistleblower letters and her claims to credibility on intelligence matters. We should realize her thought process has less to do with Ethical Decision Making like she claims and more to do with partisanship, pure and simple. In fact, I am beginning to think her whistleblower letter was 100% about attention grabbing in the twilight of her career.

This whole incident has me utterly disgusted and for it I am taking points away on the scoreboard (- 5).


Blogger David Bailey said...

Man, you're just digging for reasons to criticize Rowley, aren't you? In the very quote you provide, it says "she approved it", then you accuse her of blaming someone else.

Do you read your own blog?

You and the rest of your right-wing brethren are correct that the photo was in poor taste and should never have been posted. But you're overreacting quite a bit: the photo compared Kline to a 1960's sitcom character for crying out loud.

And let's be clear about what Rowley did after her error in judgement. She took the photo down, issued a public apology to Kline, and took responsibility for the lapse in judgement, contrary to what you're attempting to spin.

And while her behavior after the fact doesn't excuse her original lapse in judgement, it's worth nothing that Republicans rarely take such responsibility for such errors (do the names Saxby Chambliss and Mel Martinez ring a bell)? That would also include John Kline

February 01, 2006  
Blogger Tony Garcia said...

Rowley set her own standards: "Ethical decision making."

Her apology should have been "I'm sorry, yes I approved the message."

There was no need to sit and justify it ("oh, it was done by someone else, i was looking at the text, can't really blame me").

"Digging for reasons"? Not really. She is handing them out like candy.

What I find interesting is that YOU also are trying to rationalize making references of an opponent to "Nazi".

This is a low-ball tactic and you should at least be honest enough to admit two things.
1) She is failing in her own standards. There was nothing ethical about her campaign, much less THAT posting.
2) That posting is a slimeball thing to do.

Can you admit that? Are you an intellectual honest liberal?

Or will you rationalize it all? Are you a intellectually dishonest, honor-challenged liberal?

At least I can call out the wrong doing of my party...can you?

February 01, 2006  
Blogger David Bailey said...

No, I don't admit that posting the photo was "a slimeball thing to do". What I do admit (as you can see in my original comment) is that "the photo was in poor taste and should never have been posted".

Further, I don't admit that "There is nothing ethical about the campaign". On the contrary, although you are working hard to generate that impression, I believe the Col. Klink photo is the only instance where the Rowley campaign has shown a lack of judgement.

I don't know about you, but to me "ethical decision making" doesn't mean "error-free decision making". Everyone will make mistakes: the true test of character is how one recovers from them.

What I saw was a candidate who acknowledged her error, corrected it, and apologized for it.

And while we're on the subject of ethics, what about John Kline and folks like yourselves who insist on shouting the word "Nazi" at the top of your lungs? Coleen Rowley never used that word to refer to John Kline, and the photo was clearly intended to compare Kline to Col. Klink of Hogan's Heroes --- and I doubt that most people think "Nazi" when they think of Klink.

By framing this as a case of "Rowley called Kline a Nazi", you folks are behaving just as unethically as you're accusing Rowley of behaving. More so, actually, since it's clear you will neither acknowledge your dishonesty nor apologize for it.

February 26, 2006  
Blogger Tony Garcia said...

Who shouts "Nazi" at the top of their lungs?

That would be the Democrats and Liberals. What group actually paid money for people's commercials and gave "winner" title to the ones that called Bush "Hitler"? Yep, that was liberals.

Get your facts striaght. You are absolutely wasting my time.

Rowley did not accept full responsibility...she blamed it on an unpaid volunteer.

Her campaign has been smearing (without cause) since Day 1.

And, no, the link to a tv show was not clear. I have never seen that dumb show. It was a Nazi uniform and fits in perfect line with tactics from the Left since November 2000.

The distinction you are making about her campaign is not ethical vs mistakes. It is intentional vs unintentional and ethical OR legal. Her "mistakes" are intentional and the fits every single ounce of rhetoric she has used since becoming and tool of the Left (I mean, since announcing her candidacy). Her actions are legal but unethical.

I suppose it does not surprise me that a Rowley apologist is unable to understand how unethical her campaign is. The Left has spent so much time engaged in relative ethics that they can no longer see what is unethical.

I am done wasting my time with you. Bring some actually reference. You blog does not constitute "fact" or reference for sources.

February 26, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home