Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:16 AM
Original message |
The fallacy of the Right's most oft repeated two talking points. |
|
I've not been able to watch much tv today because other responsibilities took priority.
But EVERY Right-wing pundit that I've seen on any show has used this talking point:
"How could Scooter Libby have exposed Plame as an undercover agent when she hadn't even worked for the CIA in five years?"
And then, they try to impugn Joseph Wilson's character with this:
"Wilson is less than honest. He said that Cheney sent him to Niger, when the truth is that his own wife requested that he go."
Ok, if Valerie had not worked for the CIA in five years, how in heaven's name could she have had the authority to send her husband to Niger in 2003?
Doesn't the author of these two talking points, which evidently have been disseminated to ever single Republican appearing on tv, realize that the first statement makes the second statement impossible?
Have y'all discussed this already? I can't believe that no one has challenged these pundits when they use these two talking points within seconds of each other.
|
The_Casual_Observer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:19 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Here is my talking point: If Libby was on the level, why did he lie? |
Frances
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:22 AM
Response to Original message |
|
I don't think Republicans are rational, so it doesn't matter what they say. They just like to blow hot air.
|
JimmyJazz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:25 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I'm really having trouble with all of this he said/ she said crap. |
|
What I really wanna know is who had oral sex with whom? :crazy:
|
Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Wish that a blow job was the only thing we had to worry about.
:hi: :pals:
|
deadparrot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:27 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Well, I know Wilson addresses the second point in his book. |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-29-05 12:28 AM by deadparrot
"Apart from being the conduit of a message from a colleague in her office asking if I would be willing to have a conversation about Niger's uranium industry, Valerie had nothing to do with the matter. Though she worked on weapons of mass destruction issues, she was not at the meeting I attended where the subject of Niger's uranium was discussed, when the possibility of my actually traveling to the country was broached. She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip."
...
"But how stupid, I thought. The suggestion that Valerie might have improperly influenced the decision to send me to Niger was easy to disprove. The White House had already acknowledged that the Niger uranium leak was unsubstantiated. Yes, I had been among those who early on reported this but at the moment, it should have been the administration's priority to find out who had betrayed the president by putting lies in his mouth, rather than to attack someone who had brought the truth to him."
Joe Wilson, The Politics of Truth, p. 5-7
|
Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. Thank you for taking the time to type those two quotations. |
|
And for reminding me that I really need to read that book.
:hi:
|
deadparrot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. No problem...I had it right next to me. |
|
It's very good. Highly recommended. :)
|
Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. I bet you've been referring to it quite frequently today, huh. |
|
Yep, I'm going to pick it up tomorrow and read it this weekend. :toast:
|
deadparrot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
Figured I'd need to refer to it throughout the day, so I could scream at the television refuting the talking heads. :)
|
Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
I guess it's a good thing that I had appointments today that I couldn't break. I would have been right there with you, screaming at the tv, with my son coming into the room every 5 minutes asking, "Were you talking to me? What's wrong?"
LOL
|
sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:35 AM
Response to Original message |
9. If she wasn't undercover, why lie at all |
|
Why would Scooter lie about speaking about her if she wasn't undercover. There would be no crime for him to try to cover up. Libby's lies are pretty well unspinnable.
|
Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
12. Exactly. But, further, why continue to spin what, logically, can't be. |
|
Why do they CONTINUE this stupid talking point? One precludes the other.
I'm just glad that they cannot attack Fitzgerald, because too many of them are on record discussing how much they admire him.
....unless they are going to "flip...flop."
|
two gun sid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:38 AM
Response to Original message |
10. All spin and bullshit... |
|
attacking the Wilson's is the only option they have. After Fitzgerald's news conference today they can't go after him without exposing themselves as partisan hacks. This thing is a long ways from over.
|
Maddy McCall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. I agree, sid. A long way from over. |
|
I am hopeful that the American citizenry has watched and listened today...the majority of people don't trust Bush anymore. I am thinking that the pundits are HURTING their own cause by continuing to lie and deceive. The American populace is no longer sleepwalking.
|
VPStoltz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 01:03 AM
Response to Original message |
15. But when confronted with their shit, the excuse would have something |
|
to do with the "liberal media." Or the Clintons, of course. Read E.J. Dionne's syndicated column in today's papers - the Repugs are willing to sacrifice and/or change their "principles" whenever it is needed to advance their politics.
|
Midnight Rambler
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 01:46 AM
Response to Original message |
16. You do realize you're asking RWers to think, don't you? |
|
Since when is critical thought their strong suit?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 14th 2024, 02:09 PM
Response to Original message |