Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways

[SlaveNoMore]

y Shape Shifter
Listen, you motherfucking jackass.

Hungover?

I don't recall being a big cheerleader for this, but I did enjoy it.

I enjoyed it too, but probably for different reasons than you.

Though it may not have been civil, that was probably the most insightful exchange on Crossfire since the Kinsley/Buchanan era.

Insightful? No. Noteworthy? Yes, I'll grant you that.

I think it is telling that you hold the conservative standard bearer to the same standards as a basic cable comedian.

Stewart ceased becoming a mere comedian when (1) upon learning that 25% of our misinformed youth use his show as their primary news source, he (2) decided to use it as a bully pulpit.

That being said, I thought he was an arrogant dick when I met him back in '96, so my opinion hasn't changing much.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop




eta Slave's picture as well

So it's down to codpiece vs. condom?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
You have just laid out the NYT's Board Motto.

Because, six days before the election, they know it's true.

I would have no quibble with a "let's take a reasoned approach to this" outlook had the NYT, CBS, ABC, Kerry, et all, not tried to score so many points with this tripe yesterday. Just don't tell me that you get to make the initial scream, garner the idiot votes from it, and then benefit from a measured examination of what was said right before we vote.

If you are going to pretend that all of the major media are house organs of the Democratic Party, there's really no point in conversing at all. We could just go to our respective branches and grunt at each other. I see that you've omitted NBC from your list of sinners, presumably because they've run with the story you like this time. Meanwhile, the NYT ran Judith Miller stories about WMD for months which swallowed govt leaks hook, line and sinker, and yet they're going to Hell.

Kerry picked up on news headlines that fit his campaign message. Big surprise. I cannot believe that you think Kerry should be giving a "let's take a reasoned approach to this," whatever the hell that means, one week before an election. (If he did, you would be calling him nuanced and French and unfit to lead.) Since Bush's campaign is increasingly based on lying about Kerry's position (see, e.g., Kerry's plan for a government takeover of health care, and his willingness to let the UN veto our foreign policy), we can all agree that you are not exactly articulating a neutral code of behavior that you think all candidates should abide by.

The real question is what to make of the various stories about the missing explosives. I asked you, several posts ago, what was wrong or missing from Marshall's account. You have yet to respond. I do not understand why you think the NYT story is an old one, since you are also complaining that they just scooped CBS, and since it appears the White House did not know about all this until recently. I also do not understand why you think the NBC trumps what (e.g.) the NYT and AP have reported.

eta:

Since I don't have time to read all the coverage, here's what Sullivan says:

• Many of you have demanded I retract my criticisms of the Bush administration's handling of the explosives cache at al Qa Qaaa. If the facts really do emerge that these materials were removed before or during the invasion, I will. But the evidence is far murkier than that and points predominantly in the direction of U.S. negligence. Marshall has the best summary. Two things stand out for me: David Kay believes the stuff was looted after the invasion; no news crew, like NBC's, would have had the capacity to check the inventory of a plant hundreds of buildings big. But if the facts change, I'll respond.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
... there's really no point in conversing at all. We could just go to our respective branches and grunt at each other.

Board Motto!

(Between now and Election Day)

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Listen, you motherfucking jackass. I don't recall being a big cheerleader for this, but I did enjoy it. Though it may not have been civil, that was probably the most insightful exchange on Crossfire since the Kinsley/Buchanon era. I think it is telling that you hold the conservative standard bearer to the same standards as a basic cable comedian.

I love Stewart. You won't find a bigger fan of the way he smears the dishonesty of both parties. But his bit on Crossfire was preachy and annoying. Carlson and Begala are morons hired to spit the views of morons at one another. They're composites of all the worst stereotypes of rabid Republicans and Dems. Yelling at them for being what they're paid to be is silly. Stewart wasted his breath. He should stick to just showing the lies from both sides of the aisles. Thats miles more effective and memorable than preaching.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
By the powers invested in me by Slave, leagl, RT, MR, and the Commonwealth of Virginia, and as constrained by the United States Constitution, the World Trade Organization, and the United Nations, I hereby declare in all moderation that the phrase "motherfucking jackass" shall henceforth be a jocular term of affection on this board. That is all.

Gee Ty, you sure are one motherfucking jackass.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Dan Rather? His columns are calculated tedium, a weekly News of the Blah. I don't even know why he bothers with a column.

Because he's been senile since 1998.

"This election is hotter than a wet platypus in the Waco sun, people."

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore

That being said, I thought he was an arrogant dick when I met him back in '96, so my opinion hasn't changing much.

She wasn't going to fuck you anyway.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Fun, fun.

Meantime, 2 to what Ty said. It sounds like we're still sorting out BC'04's Monday strategy of "it was gone when we got there."

I understand that this is now part of GOP Lore, what with IAEA deciding to piss away its credibility by telling brazen lies to fuck with the Administration, but if someone could post links to "news sources" that explains why they would do this, that would be great.

I posted them yesterday.

[Replaced_Texan]

Amazingly, it looks like the Dallas Morning News editorial staff is going to have to root for the Redskins over the Packers on Halloween. Green Bay had a rough start, but it looks like they're coming together now. Washington hasn't exactly been a powerhouse this year though.

The good news for Bush, though, is that the Weekly Reader poll results are in, and they've never been wrong. "Since 1956, Weekly Reader students in grades 1-12 have correctly picked the president, making the Weekly Reader poll one of the most accurate predictors of presidential outcomes in history."

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I love Stewart. You won't find a bigger fan of the way he smears the dishonesty of both parties. But his bit on Crossfire was preachy and annoying. Carlson and Begala are morons hired to spit the views of morons at one another. They're composites of all the worst stereotypes of rabid Republicans and Dems. Yelling at them for being what they're paid to be is silly. Stewart wasted his breath. He should stick to just showing the lies from both sides of the aisles. Thats miles more effective and memorable than preaching.

2. I am writing in my diary tonight that I completely agreed with Sebby on something. The world may be ending.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
I keep reading your posts, and not responding, mostly out of confusion over where you're drawing the link between what El Baradei reported, and pronouncements by the Iraqis. Are you saying he's just someone's conduit?

Yes.

If I understand it correctly, the IAEA has not been inside Iraq since shortly before the invasion because the U.S. Administration has not allowed them back in to inspect their previously secured sites (this may have changed recently).

The interim Iraqi government, however, is still responsible for reporting to the IAEA on the various WMD or "dual-use" programs and items under the IAEA monitoring regime. (Just because the government changed doesn't mean the monitoring stops.)

The report of the missing 350+ tons of high explosives (dual-use HX or whatever-X) -- previously under IAEA "seal" (i.e. labeled and subject to inspection) -- came to the IAEA in a letter from the interim Iraqi government, and (I understand) contained the characterizations I cited regarding the circumstances of its loss.

So, the IAEA reports this to the U.N. Security Council -- "Hey, XYZ has gone missing since the invasion."

That's part of why I find the allegation that the IAEA just made this up to be remarkable.

S_A_M

P.S. Some unsourced reports also say that the U.S. government has been presuring the Iraqis not to report the loss, and the IAEa not to pass the report along, "yet."

[eta: Here's a link:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...ves/index.html

This article has all kinds of intersting stuff, including some deatiled Pentagon denials that it was around when we looked, but here's the directly responsive part:

"The International Atomic Energy Agency revealed Monday that it had been told two weeks ago by the Iraqi government that 380 tons of HMX and RDX disappeared from Al Qaqaa after Saddam Hussein's government fell.

"In a letter to the IAEA dated October 10, Iraq's director of planning, Mohammed Abbas, said the material disappeared sometime after Saddam's regime fell in April 2003, which he attributed to 'the theft and looting of the governmental installations due to lack of security.'" ]

So, the IAEA made this up?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
So it's down to codpiece vs. condom?

When has it not been?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan

The good news for Bush, though, is that the Weekly Reader poll results are in, and they've never been wrong. "Since 1956, Weekly Reader students in grades 1-12 have correctly picked the president, making the Weekly Reader poll one of the most accurate predictors of presidential outcomes in history."

Doesn't that mean they're long overdue for error?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If you are going to pretend that all of the major media are house organs of the Democratic Party, there's really no point in conversing at all.

No. We've got Fox.

I think we've now moved to the English system of partisan media. I think the media need to explicitly recognize and state this. There are too many undecided morons who might still think that "I read it in the paper, so it must be true . . . ."

Kerry picked up on news headlines that fit his campaign message. Big surprise. I cannot believe that you think Kerry should be giving a "let's take a reasoned approach to this," whatever the hell that means, one week before an election.

You're right on this point. I shouldn't include Kerry in that list. He's the candidate. I can't hold him to a standard that I'm attempting to apply to "neutral" deliverers of news.

Since Bush's campaign is increasingly based on lying about Kerry's position (see, e.g., Kerry's plan for a government takeover of health care . . .

Um, have you read Kerry's "plan"? That's what it is. Private insurance pays for low-limit stuff. Gov picks up everything above that limit.

. . . . and his willingness to let the UN veto our foreign policy . . .

We're quibbling over definitions. "Veto"? No. Do I think he will look for foreign approval to the detriment of our country? Yep.

The real question is what to make of the various stories about the missing explosives. I asked you, several posts ago, what was wrong or missing from Marshall's account. You have yet to respond. I do not understand why you think the NYT story is an old one, since you are also complaining that they just scooped CBS, and since it appears the White House did not know about all this until recently. I also do not understand why you think the NBC trumps what (e.g.) the NYT and AP have reported.

Old story, with a new spin from the IAEA report.

I think what the White House didn't "know" earlier was that the Times would fall for it, and report that they disappeared on Bush's watch. They already knew that there was a big stash there at some point pre-invasion.

Like I said earlier, my complaint isn't with the objective details of the stories. It's that the Times trumpets what hasn't been developed yet, and then, when more info is brought to the public's attention, the people who were reading the Times yesterday and crowing are now saying, well, no, let's wait and see. You've already done the damage, and now you want the fix to be careful and methodical? Call me a cynic, but . . .


(BTW, I must have missed the Josh link. On the now-dead board?)