Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The fallacy of the Right's most oft repeated two talking points.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:16 AM
Original message
The fallacy of the Right's most oft repeated two talking points.
I've not been able to watch much tv today because other responsibilities took priority.

But EVERY Right-wing pundit that I've seen on any show has used this talking point:

"How could Scooter Libby have exposed Plame as an undercover agent when she hadn't even worked for the CIA in five years?"

And then, they try to impugn Joseph Wilson's character with this:

"Wilson is less than honest. He said that Cheney sent him to Niger, when the truth is that his own wife requested that he go."

Ok, if Valerie had not worked for the CIA in five years, how in heaven's name could she have had the authority to send her husband to Niger in 2003?

Doesn't the author of these two talking points, which evidently have been disseminated to ever single Republican appearing on tv, realize that the first statement makes the second statement impossible?

Have y'all discussed this already? I can't believe that no one has challenged these pundits when they use these two talking points within seconds of each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Here is my talking point: If Libby was on the level, why did he lie?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. Good point
I don't think Republicans are rational, so it doesn't matter what they say. They just like to blow hot air.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JimmyJazz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. I'm really having trouble with all of this he said/ she said crap.
What I really wanna know is who had oral sex with whom? :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. LOL
Wish that a blow job was the only thing we had to worry about.

:hi: :pals:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deadparrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
4. Well, I know Wilson addresses the second point in his book.
Edited on Sat Oct-29-05 12:28 AM by deadparrot
"Apart from being the conduit of a message from a colleague in her office asking if I would be willing to have a conversation about Niger's uranium industry, Valerie had nothing to do with the matter. Though she worked on weapons of mass destruction issues, she was not at the meeting I attended where the subject of Niger's uranium was discussed, when the possibility of my actually traveling to the country was broached. She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip."

...

"But how stupid, I thought. The suggestion that Valerie might have improperly influenced the decision to send me to Niger was easy to disprove. The White House had already acknowledged that the Niger uranium leak was unsubstantiated. Yes, I had been among those who early on reported this but at the moment, it should have been the administration's priority to find out who had betrayed the president by putting lies in his mouth, rather than to attack someone who had brought the truth to him."

Joe Wilson, The Politics of Truth, p. 5-7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Thank you for taking the time to type those two quotations.
And for reminding me that I really need to read that book.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deadparrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. No problem...I had it right next to me.
It's very good. Highly recommended. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. I bet you've been referring to it quite frequently today, huh.
Yep, I'm going to pick it up tomorrow and read it this weekend. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deadparrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Definitely.
Figured I'd need to refer to it throughout the day, so I could scream at the television refuting the talking heads. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. LOL
I guess it's a good thing that I had appointments today that I couldn't break. I would have been right there with you, screaming at the tv, with my son coming into the room every 5 minutes asking, "Were you talking to me? What's wrong?"

LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
9. If she wasn't undercover, why lie at all
Why would Scooter lie about speaking about her if she wasn't undercover. There would be no crime for him to try to cover up. Libby's lies are pretty well unspinnable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Exactly. But, further, why continue to spin what, logically, can't be.
Why do they CONTINUE this stupid talking point? One precludes the other.

I'm just glad that they cannot attack Fitzgerald, because too many of them are on record discussing how much they admire him.

....unless they are going to "flip...flop."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
two gun sid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
10. All spin and bullshit...
attacking the Wilson's is the only option they have. After Fitzgerald's news conference today they can't go after him without exposing themselves as partisan hacks. This thing is a long ways from over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. I agree, sid. A long way from over.
I am hopeful that the American citizenry has watched and listened today...the majority of people don't trust Bush anymore. I am thinking that the pundits are HURTING their own cause by continuing to lie and deceive. The American populace is no longer sleepwalking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VPStoltz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
15. But when confronted with their shit, the excuse would have something
to do with the "liberal media." Or the Clintons, of course. Read E.J. Dionne's syndicated column in today's papers - the Repugs are willing to sacrifice and/or change their "principles" whenever it is needed to advance their politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midnight Rambler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
16. You do realize you're asking RWers to think, don't you?
Since when is critical thought their strong suit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC