Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Rich. So Teddy's claim that this war was "hatch" down in Texas is not a conspiracy theory?
|
I do not understand how you could confuse me with Teddy. Nor do I even know what you are talking about. I get most of my news about Teddy and Al and Hillary from the conservatives on this board.
Quote:
|
I don't disagree that some of the things said turned out to be untrue. Where I think we disagree is that I don't believe they thought these things were untrue at the time they said them. You seem to suggest that you do. So in other words, they lied, right?
|
"Lied" is a poor shorthand for reckless disregard for the truth. Go back to those quotes I posted from the Woodward book. On Friday, General Myers tells Bush that they've been looking for WMD in Iraq for 10 years and they haven't found any. On Sunday, Bush stands in front of reporters and says, "Hussein has weapons of mass destruction." What was he thinking? I don't rightly know. One of Bush's strengths as a leader is his ability to simplify and distill issues. I think he thought that after the invasion, WMD would be found, and he was more interested in making his case convincing than he was in being accurate. Is it fair to call this lying? I guess it depends on your definition of "lying." There is no doubt that he was representing as fact something that he did not know. He was trying to convince people that Iraq had WMD to gain support for a war. If you did this to sell a product, it would be fraud.
When Cheney said "there is no doubt" that Hussein has WMD, and there was doubt, that was a lie. What Bush said is better only by shades.
Quote:
|
I didn't link to them because I didn't see them.
|
If you didn't realize that job growth isn't living up to the Administration's predictions, then that's a good reason for having failed to post about it.
Quote:
|
Do you really believe that GE has editorial control over NBC? That Disney has editorial control over ABC? Do you really? Who is failing to think cricially now? Take that Michael Moore logic back to Ontario.
|
Editorial control? It depends on what you mean. But you are the one positing a conspiracy of the major media to destroy the President, so maybe you should explain how it is that all of these various corporations get together to pursue their nefarious plan. I'm no great fan of the media, as I've made clear on this board and the other. What I can't understand at all is how conservatives who otherwise seem to grasp how markets work go stupid when they start to discuss large corporations that are in the business of selling advertising with their programming. It's like the normal rules of reason and logic are suspended when you start talking about the liberal media.
What's what you suspected? I don't think there is a Dem party line, but if there was one I wouldn't toe it.
etfs
