[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
I had trouble parsing what Bolton’s philosophy was, because he was speaking in slogans and slogans are designed to stop thought rather than promote it. I couldn’t tell whether he actually believed those slogans were true - frightening, if so - or if he is just so well-trained that he can spout them without needing to think about the question - frightening, if so.
[/QUOTE]
This is something members of the “echo machine” do as a matter of course. A given individual makes statements, in varying degrees away from reality, and just lets it run out there, usually knowing that he won’t be called on it if what he says is complete bullshit–and who cares if someone does establish the truth of the statement later on, because they’re closing the barn door with the horse way down the road and the damage is already done.
This interview was a classic example. I knew Bolton was wrong about Lincoln (or to be more accurate, was wrong about Stewart being wrong about Lincoln) the moment he said it. But the verification that he was wrong only came a day later–long after many people heard the erroneous statement, which some subset of those people probably believed (and never heard the rebuttal).
So it often goes with the likes of Bolton and other “Bushies”. The m.o. boils down to arguments based on appeals to authority, with the person stating the argument usually standing themselves as the authority (“He worked in the Justice Dept., he was ambassador to the UN–he must know what he’s talking about.”). It doesn’t fool the sharpest folks, but most don’t have the smarts or the gumption to follow through and find out the truth. Frightening if so indeed.