Ok, thanks…missed that. Will check it out.
-XT
I nominate XT to be our official SDMB Shodan archivist! He has impeccable non-partisan credentials, is familiar with the complexities of the “search” functions, and is not as likely as many of us to run screaming from the room shouting “Greeb! Greeb! Kitang kitang kitang!”
Me, I wouldn’t last an hour, not without more drugs than I can afford.
Do I hear a second to the motion?
Your reading of the memo was just as distorted then as it is now, and what you claim is in there just isn’t, and it won’t be, no matter how many times you bring it up. Your statements made earlier about the contents of the memo are not supported by the facts.
I say we give elucidator the job and the drugs he needs to do it! His posts might be even more fun to read!
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
Regards,
Shodan
Did the memo in question tell his news people to slant their coverage against Bush to try to keep him from being re-elected? Yes or no.
If yes, quote the specific line.
“Translation: The memo does not say what I keep repeating that it says, but I’m going to a) keep repeating what it does not say, and when that does not work b) post vague non-sequitors in an attempt to appear scholarly.”
Do not think for one second I will forget that you lied to me. :mad:
Moderator, please remove the last line from my post above. I tried to edit it but I missed the window. My apologies (to the moderators, not you, Shodan.)
Evidently, a Nineteen Eighty-Four reference. Having never read the book, I can’t figure out how it applies here.
So, because you cannot actually provide evidence about a claim that you inserted into this thread, you are now going to accuse other posters of being dishonest?
Knock it off.
If you cannot provide evidence of your claim, stop threadshitting with your repeated irrelevant remarks. (And your remarks in the other linked thread carefully avoid pointing out where Halperin actually said what you claim he said, so that defense fails.)
OTOH, Czarcasm and others: once a poster has demonstrated that he or she has no interest in the debate, persistent efforts to engage him or her is nothing more than hijacking the thread, so just drop it.
[ /Moderating ]
As others have noted, I was referring to GWB’s Nat’l guard service record, specifically his apparent failure to fulfill the requirements of his military service contract. While there is no doubt that the folks at CBS failed in their due diligence when the story was reported, the facts of the case appear to be clear…that GWB was negligent in fulfilling his contract and that he managed to avoid any disciplinary action.
His negligence was probably forgivable; a lot of people avoided service in Viet Nam via the national guard and a lot of guardsmen have not taken their duty particularly seriously. But what was unconscionable was that at the same time the story broke, the Bush partisans, in the form of the so-called “swift boaters” were maliciously smearing his opponent who actually had served with distinction in the Viet Nam conflict.
Your attempt to equate the questioning of GWB’s service with the blatantly false and dishonest smear campaigns waged by the right wing is pathetic.
SS
I think Shodan missed the point that the allegations in the forged memo were true and, just as they did with Lewinsky etc., GOP operatives managed to divert the media onto a less relevant sideshow.
I still think it’s likely that Karl Rove, or one of his fans, was responsible for the forged memo. With Google, I see that someone else has the same suspicion. I find it very sad that this thug was one of the country’s chief policymakers for eight years, considering the bullets on his resume:
[ul]
[li] In the 1996 Alabama Supreme Court race between Democratic incumbent Kenneth Ingram and Republican challenger Harold See, Rove printed anonymous fliers attacking See, his own client. The purpose was “‘to create a backlash against the Democrat,’ as Joe Perkins, who worked for Ingram, put it to me,” Green writes. “Presumably the public would believe that Democrats were spreading terrible rumors about See and his family. … The ploy left Rove’s opponent at a loss. Ingram’s staff realized that it would be fruitless to try to persuade the public that the See campaign was attacking its own candidate.”[/li][li] Rove’s slimiest moment came in 1994, when See first ran for the Supreme Court in Alabama against Democratic incumbent Mark Kennedy, who had just served a term as president of the National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect. Kennedy’s commercials highlighted his volunteer work - and included one that showed him holding hands with children - so Rove started a whispering campaign that Kennedy was a pedophile, Green writes. “What Rove does is try and make something so bad for a family that the candidate will not subject the family to the hardship,” explained Perkins. [/li][li] In 1970, College Republican Rove stole letterhead from the Illinois Democratic campaign of Alan Dixon, and used it to invite hundreds of people to Dixon’s new headquarters opening, promising free beer, free food, girls and a good time for nothing, disrupting the event.[/li][li] When Rove advised on George W. Bush’s 1994 race for governor of Texas against Democratic incumbent Ann Richards, a persistent whisper campaign in conservative East Texas wrongly suggested that Richards was a lesbian. According to Texas journalist Lou Dubose: “No one ever traced the character assassination to Rove. Yet no one doubts that Rove was behind it. It’s a process on which he holds a patent. Identify your opponent’s strength, and attack it so relentlessly that it becomes a liability. Richards was admired because she promised and delivered a ‘government that looked more like the people of the state.’ That included the appointment of blacks, Hispanics and gays and lesbians. Rove made that asset a liability.”[/li][li] After John McCain thumped George W. Bush in the 2000 New Hampshire primary, with 48 percent of the vote to Bush’s 30 percent, a massive smear campaign was launched in South Carolina, a key battleground. TV attack ads from third groups and anonymous fliers circulated, variously suggesting that McCain’s experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam left him mentally scarred with an uncontrollable temper, that his wife, Cindy, abused drugs and that he had an African-American “love child.”[/li][li] According to the investigation of Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, Rove played a central role in the outing of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame to columnist Robert Novak and former Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper, in retaliation for her husband Joe Wilson’s accusation that the Bush administration falsely claimed that Saddam Hussein sought uranium in Niger.[/li][li] Rove has ignored subpoenas to testify before Congress regarding the Justice Department scandal of the firing of nine U.S. attorneys. He skipped a hearing on improper use of RNC e-mail accounts by White House staff, which allowed them to skirt the Presidential Records Act.[/li][/ul]
(Some of the above are excerpted from this page.)
An excerpt from the first cite gives substance to the hunch that the forged memos were a White House trick:
If I insult Karl Rove, and lament that the country has been controlled by bastards of his ilk, am I part of the problem or part of the solution?
So you managed to find one whole other person on the internet that also thinks Rove might have been involved? Nothing in your post supports the allegation that Rove had anything to do with the forged documents. He may have produced phony flyers and started whispering campaigns, and for that there is no defense, but correct me if I’m wrong because IANAL, but that would have been illegal, and I don’t know of anything to make me think that even Rove would go that far.
The evidence has been provided.
No they don’t. Read the thread.
Yes.
Halperin claims "the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns ". This means that the election is approaching. Hence the reference to campaigns. He also claims ABC is “one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest.” This means they should attempt to convince voters not to vote for Bush, because re-electing Bush is not in the public interest.
I note for the record that septimus’ ridiculous claim that Rove was behind the forgeries passes unchallenged by the moderators.
So, to sum up, yes, there is such a memo, from Halperin, and Czarcasm’s pretense that there is not is (obviously) false. It does say what I said, to a person fluent in English (and not blinded by partisanship).
Regards,
Shodan
Some people can read between the lines. You can apparently read between lines that aren’t even there.
I totally lack the non-partisan credentials so crucial to the assignment. Plus, I experimented with drugs when I was in college. They worked, college didn’t.
Slice off the extreme edge of each party and just look at what’s left, there’s really no difference.
The media both network and cable have agendas that use words out of context and soundbites to gin up drama and sell their product. Then you have people trying to substantiate their preconceived positions based on that drama.
Policy-wise, the only groups that have been the most sincerely consistent are true conservatives and libertarians. They bitched when Bush passed stupid spending measures just as much as Obama passing them. Everyone else basically is full of shit.
If you slice off the extreme edge of both parties you end up with most of the Democrats and a thin sliver of the GOP. It is not that both parties have polarized, it is that the Rupublicans have drifted so far to the right, that they have left a huge chasm between themselves and the rest of America.
True, but I challenged it. Would you be interested in returning the favor, so to speak, by answering the question I asked in post #57, to wit:
“Do you think it possible that the actions of Dan Rather and CBS regarding the documents were not undertaken to discredit Bush, but instead merely to break a ratings-grabbing news story? IOW, do you believe CBS was acting primarily in the interest of seeing that Bush was not reelected?”
You got it. It’s all about “us vs them” and “our guy is great but your guy sucks”. Hell I was one of the people tossing insults at Bush. It was fun (and too easy). My bad, that’s an insult too 
The decisionator, the commander in chimp, Curious George, etc. Yeah I said all that. Why try to deny or re-write the past?
I’m just glad we don’t hear the “American hating traitor” rhetoric so much anymore. That was ridiculous.