Is this for real?

POSTED BY: SergeantX
UPDATED: Saturday, July 23, 2005 19:40
VIEWED: 4249
PAGE 2 of 5

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:26 PM

Quote:
I'm not sure that any of them are false. I'm waiting for the special prosecutor to come out with his findings before I make any decisions, just like any rational American should do

... And then you go on to discuss the case. Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot. Can you give me one good reason why I shouldn't be creating my own "talking points", just like the RNC? Or is it becase critics are supposed to shut up and wait for the Special Prosecutor, but you and the RNC get a pass?

EMBERS

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
Apparently Bush's latest position is that anyone in his government convicted of treason will be given a very stern talking to

actually I thought they would be given the medal of Freedom?

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:39 PM

I just thought I would bring in some REAL facts from another thread, since Rove/ Bush supporters have chosen not to respond:
----------------------------------------
Lynch asks:

Quote:
Where are the facts that Karl Rove did something wrong?

The answer is

Quote:
But Cooper said he was told by Mr Rove that information was about to be “declassified” and made public to discredit the woman’s husband, Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador who had accused the Bush Administration of exaggerating the threat of Iraq’s weapons.

Cooper said Mr Rove told him that Mr Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA on weapons of mass destruction issues, and ended the call by saying: “I’ve already said too much.”

Cooper said yesterday: “This could have meant he was worried about being indiscreet, or it could have meant he was late for a meeting . . . but that sign-off has been in my memory for two years.” Cooper also disclosed for the first time that the other White House source for an article he wrote about Mr Wilson in July 2003 was Vice-President Cheney’s chief of staff, Lewis “Scooter ” Libby, who also did not mention Ms Plame by name.

If Rove said the information was about to be declassified he obviously knew it was classified.

Rove was required to sign Standard Form 312 (SF-312) which requires not only that he not divulge classified information, but also that

Quote:
Before ... confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, ... confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure

Both Rove and Libby have certainly violated the terms of their security clearance. Now that Bush has an idea how deep in shit Rove is, Bush is flip-flopping from his original stance to fire anyone who was "involved" to anyone who is convicted of a crime.

SERGEANTX

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:54 PM

No, No, No.

Shame on you SignyM. This is exactly what the 'Talking Points' are designed to do. They inject distraction and irrelevancies and bog everyone down in their quicksand. THEY decide what we're going to be talking about and everyone, including the media, happily complies. Screw that.

How about, instead, we talk about people pretending to engage in political discourse, pretending to think for themselves, when really all they're doing is parroting a damage control campaign engineered by party headquarters?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

BARNSTORMER

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
I'm not sure that any of them are false. I'm waiting for the special prosecutor to come out with his findings before I make any decisions, just like any rational American should do
... And then you go on to discuss the case. Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot. Can you give me one good reason why I shouldn't be creating my own "talking points", just like the RNC? Or is it becase critics are supposed to shut up and wait for the Special Prosecutor, but you and the RNC get a pass?

You mean you have'nt?

It seems to me that anyone who utters the same "facts" over and over again is essentially using "Talking Points". Whether they are officially printed out, or scribbled on a piece of paper, or just stored in your own head.

Your talking points are well known to anyone who frequents the Real World Events topics.

My only want is to know which talking points are true, no matter who speaks them before I make any decisions. Is that to much to ask? Is it Innapropriate? Or does that opinion automatically make me a RNC Lackey in your opinion?

Quote from SignyM's post ***********************

why I shouldn't be creating my own "talking points", just like the RNC? Or is it becase critics are supposed to shut up and wait for the Special Prosecutor, but you and the RNC get a pass?

End quote***************************************

I don't know. I'll have to ask my Masters at the RNC during the next Board Meeting before I answer that

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:06 PM

Sarge- Now I'm going to respond to YOUR comments. Sorry for getting sidetracked.

The Republicans have used "talking points" for the past two decades. I don't know how far you go back, but Reagan was the first to use the tactic of simple quips, repeated often. The other half of "talking points" is never to get sidetracked into actual discussions, never respond to critics, or in the words of the Reagan admin "Never explain and never defend". It lends an air of invulnerability. And finally, the other thing that Republicans are especially good at is lies (McCain's wife was hooked on drugs, Kay Bailey Hutchison is lesbian, Democrats bugged Rove's office). The tactics have been very successful.

Should the Democratic Party do the same? If they did, they might be more successful in capturing the easily-swayed vote. But the likely result is that we'd have two bitterly opposing camps talking AT each other instead of WITH each other, falling in a kind of mutual death spiral to the lowest common denominator of mudslinging and lies. Unfortunately, as long as ONE side uses those tactics and until the American public matures politically and understands that reality is complex and difficult, the dynamic will push in that direction.

So the question is: Can the American public mature? We are pushed in one direction by our rich fantasy life (advertizing, TV shows, fairy tales, religion) to believe in the quick fix, the hero, the ultimate good and bad. And then messy reality intrudes and 9-11 happens.

EDITED TO ADD: Sarge, we cross-posted. You said:

Quote:
Shame on you SignyM. This is exactly what the 'Talking Points' are designed to do

This was not a talking point. I had to go and research this on the internet myself... I sure didn't get it from anyone else. Maybe I reinvented the wheel.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:08 PM

Quote:
Can you give me one good reason why I shouldn't be creating my own "talking points", just like the RNC? Or is it becase critics are supposed to shut up and wait for the Special Prosecutor, but you and the RNC get a pass? -SignyM
You mean you haven't- Barnstormer

The difference between you and me is that I'm not asking you to shut up (while continuing my spiel)

Quote:
My only want is to know which talking points are true

True, or truly criminal? The Special Prosecutor can address the last question, but not the first. BTW- at what point would YOU be satisfied that a fact was truly criminal? With an indictment? A guilty veridict? When all appeals had been exhausted?

BARNSTORMER

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Can you give me one good reason why I shouldn't be creating my own "talking points", just like the RNC? Or is it becase critics are supposed to shut up and wait for the Special Prosecutor, but you and the RNC get a pass? -SignyM
You mean you haven't- Barnstormer
The difference between you and me is that I'm not asking you to shut up (while continuing my spiel)
Quote:
My only want is to know which talking points are true
True, or truly criminal? The Special Prosecutor can address the last question, but not the first. BTW- at what point would YOU be satisfied that a fact was truly criminal? With an indictment? A guilty veridict? When all appeals had been exhausted?

SignyM, would that "spiel" be the one that states it's better to be a rational human being who prefers to discuss facts rather than politically motivated bile?

You have an interesting way of seeing things.

BTW, I don't believe I ever told anyone to "Shut Up". Where did that come from. Your responses seem a tad misleading.

"Only the facts Maam, only the facts". All misleading BS will be ignored. Your a bit to much of a political zealot to be taken seriously.

very sorry for the name calling, but there you are.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

SIGNYM

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:54 PM

Well then, how do we decide what are "facts" and what is "politically-motivated bile"? For example, is quoting from a government "briefing booklet" that accompanies a standard government form a fact, or bile, or something in-between?

It would be very helpful is we could figure out HOW to figure out what is real, what is factual but incomplete and potentially misleading, and what are lies. We could, for example, dig back to original quotes to find out who said what, and repost them in extended form, so that context is not lost. (i.e not a "talking point", which are usually just snippets, and misleading ones at that) We could do some independent legal research. Or we could do this scientifically- propose various hypotheses and see which one best predicts future outcomes?

I dunno- how would YOU propose to sort thru the welter?

SERGEANTX

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So the question is: Can the American public mature? We are pushed in one direction by our rich fantasy life (advertizing, TV shows, fairy tales, religion) to believe in the quick fix, the hero, the ultimate good and bad. And then messy reality intrudes and 9-11 happens.

That's exactly what I'm getting at. I don't think the Democrats, or any other party, should follow suit. It would only exacerbate the bitterly divided situation we find ourselves in. My hope is that the bulk of reasonable republicans will see this crap for what it is. Many of them already are. I know a few personally.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE