Friday, May 30, 2008
Battle-Stations, Yet Again!
You make a good point, Mr. O'Reilly. It appears that certain segments of the media (please note that, unlike you, I'm refraining from a blanket indictment here) have in fact been playing up the Scott McClellan book to a partisan advantage (Keith Olbermann, your competitor, in particular). Of course, what you simultaneously refuse to acknowledge here is the rather predictable pattern of your own network. I mean, come on, Bill, you have certain commentators over there at Fox (the usual suspects; Hannity, Hume, etc.) who (a large chunk undoubtedly not even having read the book) are spouting pure/down-the-line Bush administration talking-points; "the guy is disgruntled", "he's only after the money", etc.,etc.. And, yes, me-bucko, just take a look at how you yourself jumped out of the gate - YOUR "Talking Points" dressing the guy down in almost a reflexive manner, for Christ!!......................................Look, bro, I don't know if this guy is the real deal....or if he isn't. But neither do you, I'm saying. What do you say we all just take a chill-pill and hear the son-of-a-bitch out - then decide? What do you think? A deal?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Howdy Will!
I will say this about McClellan, he bypassed any claim to credibility by not saying any of this while he was still press secretary.
A man with integrity would have stood up and questioned policies he disagreed with BEFORE he left the position.
I look at this the same way I looked at Clinton. If those closest to him couldn't trust him, why should we?
That's a fair point. The same could probably said about Colin Powell and his "reservations" -this, while giving that speech at the U.N.. I don't know, though, for me, sometimes I need a little disengagement/distance for things to make sense for me. Maybe it's the same for McClellan. Or he could be an opportunist, who knows. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Look at me, though - straddling the fence as usual.
Voltron said...
Howdy Will!
I will say this about McClellan, he bypassed any claim to credibility by not saying any of this while he was still press secretary.
A man with integrity would have stood up and questioned policies he disagreed with BEFORE he left the position.
I look at this the same way I looked at Clinton. If those closest to him couldn't trust him, why should we?"
Trying to muddy the watters and deceive again I see Volty.............allow me to clarify for you McClellan CLEARLY stated he wasx deceived by Bush/Rove/Cheney............see if he was deceived and didnt realize till 2 years later that he was lied to then he couldnt have and wouldnt have resigned or questioned or challenged policies he believed were true until he realized they were not true which was 2 years later.
You are right about Clinton though.........fortunately thats a moot point because Hillary is a loser just like McSame will be in November!
I do have to give credit when its due though will I think your post is right on about all the Reich wing attack dogs spewing the same talking points to try and smear and discredit McClellan without focusing on the facts and evaluating the merits of his arguments.........all they are doing is spewing meaningless riddiculous talking points like Volty over here is doing.................blah blah blah he should have resigned or spoke out.........blah blah blah.....he is "disgruntled"
"Trying to muddy the watters and deceive again I see Volty.............allow me to clarify for you"
McClellan CLEARLY stated he wasx deceived by Bush/Rove/Cheney............see if he was deceived and didnt realize till 2 years later that he was lied to then he couldnt have and wouldnt have resigned or questioned or challenged policies he believed were true until he realized they were not true which was 2 years later.
Thanks for the clarification...
Post a Comment