Has Ferguson even opened Al Gore’s book before trashing it?

Is there any way that the netroots can reverse the right-wing slant that has taken over the WaPo?

I don’t know if this would be helpful, but check with Willie Nelson’s Biodiesel station on I-35 North of Waco.

Would it be appropriate to call it “Slick Willie’s Biodiesel” or perhaps “Willie’s Biodiesel Slick” or is that just too snarky when he’s doing such a great thing for America?

Isn’t it amazing they tried to put him away for weed and here he is leading the way for America on biodiesel?

Ferguson: It goes without saying that Gore isn’t the first politician to enlist Lincoln, however spuriously, in a pet cause. In 1992, Ronald Reagan used his last appearance at a GOP convention to warn of a liberal ascendancy that threatened Lincoln’s cherished Republican principles.

Ehh, you left out Bush and his pundit minions. A few months back they were trying to put the Lincoln mantle on Bush because Iraq is going up in flames. Not doing much of that these days are ya?

And how BushCo used Lincoln to rescind habeas corpus…ignoring the fact that Lincoln specifically pointed out that the Constitution stated that the executive can do so during times of INVASION or CIVIL INSURRECTION […but does not say that one can suspend it during a foreign war}.

Note the word “spurious”…that implies that Gore made up the quote…or at best took it out of context…but since Ferguson explicitly claims he didn’t review the source (noted in Gore’s end-notes)…he was pretty much asserting that Gore lied.

I wonder what precisely Mr. Ferguson’s credentials are as a Lincoln scholar to assert “the quote doesn’t exist” and why he would be so unaware of such classic Lincoln biographies if he were one?

In fact all the historical quotes (even those attributed to Robert Todd Lincoln) were lifted from this one newsletter.

Also notice that this account had presumably been still up for debate until the mid 90s (since the anecdote about Pete Seeger was said to have taken place “a number of years [before]” the newsletter (published in 1999).

The spuriousness of the quote does sound like a potentially legitimate complaint, but how interesting that Ferguson would probably never have found this PDF online if he hadn’t been able to google the quote itself. Ironically, footnotes and endnotes (the proto-link predecessors employed by books) only serve to obfuscate the source of a citation’s authority. I think it’s really interesting then that Ferguson seems to be in a sense demonstrating Gore’s point about how internet discourse creates a really powerful fact checking mechanism.

But internet discourse is also fantastic at unveiling the uncomfortable contextual baggage that an overly tight thesis seems to want to ignore. In this case, notice how Ferguson conveniently leaves out the way that Schwartz himself characterizes the spurious Lincoln quote: he calls it Eisenhoweresque!

But that would have clashed so awkwardly with Ferguson’s dismissive tone (not only dismissive of Gore but dismissive of the sentiment of the quote itself).

Notice the way that Schwartz (1999) bookends the spurious Lincoln quote:

A number of years ago, folk singer Pete Seeger sent a fax to the Abraham Lincoln Association trying to verify the following excerpt supposedly contained in a letter
written to Thomas Elkins on November 21, 1864: “We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war, which has cost a vast treasure of blood and money, is almost over. But I see in the future a crisis approaching which fills me with anxiety. As a result of the war, corporations have
become enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the
country will endeavor to prolong its rule by preying upon the prejudice of the people, until all wealth is concentrated in a few hands, and the republic destroyed. I feel at this time more anxiety for the future of my country than at any
time in the past, even in the midst of war.”
The tone and content foreshadows Dwight Eisenhower’s warning of the dangers of the “military and industrial complex.” But is it from the pen of Abraham Lincoln?

How interesting that the old school “fact checker” diligently following up the source in this example is Pete Seeger!

And how equally interesting that Ferguson leaves out such a useful piece of information: i.e. that while Gore’s allegiance to Lincoln-the-populist may prove misguided, Gore was unintentionally aligning with an equally potent Republican father figure (who also valued reason and public discourse), namely: Eisenhower.

The degree to which the Editorial shop at WaPo has mailed it in is astonishing. Did no one read the first sentence of this hackery before the paper went to bed? We’re only talking about the former vice president here; seems like a common-enough courtesy, especially for the friggin’ Sunday paper.

Your correction is absolutely farcical and completely inadequate. I would actually like to read 800 words on the particular process by which this “editorial” was published. Who solicited whom? — did Ferguson call WaPo or vice versa? How much money was exchanged/what was the contract? What were the names of the WaPo staff tasked with publishing this. Who pushed the “send” button, on whose authority?

I think a story like this would be a damn interesting read. I’d even pay for a copy the paper.

It’s as Joseph Pulitzer said — “Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together.”

“…The Department of Justice even invented the position of White House Liason, first time ever, who by her own admission screened applicants based on inappropriate, and probably illegal, political factors.…

“There have been an almost incredible series of half-truths and obfuscations coming out of the Attorney General and his circle:

“They told us that the firings of US attorneys was perfomance related. Not true. They told us that the Attorney General was not involved in and didn’t discuss the plan to fire US Attorneys. Not true. They told us that the White House was not involved. Not true. They told us that these EARS performance evaluations were not relevant. Not true. They told us that the Attorney General didn’t discuss the substance of his testimony with other witnesses during the investigation. Not true. They told us that the Chief of Staff to the Deputy Attorney General, never made threatening calls to U.S. Attorneys who were going to publically discuss the matter. Again, not true. How many times can the Department of Justice say things that aren’t true?…”

– Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), 11 Jun 07

How long that remains a rhetorical question is at issue, but it is still nonetheless true that these actions are now in evidence as a direct result of Democratic control of the Congress. Bravo, Senator Whitehouse, who clearly laid bare the Bushco cronyfication of the DoJ yesterday.

Larisa Alexnadrovna at Raw Story catches up with O’neil about the spy Hansen.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/….._0612.html

O’neil believes that “Although he doesn’t think there is any “correlation” between the Hanssen and Plame cases, O’Neill tells RAW STORY “a journalist that knowingly or negligently releases/reveals classified information should face federal prosecution.”

It really makes one wonder why journalist like Judy Miller and newspapers like the New York Times print seriously flawed information about pre-war intelligence and then are not held accountable by the law for very serious mistakes in their reporting.

Robert Novak prints the classified status of a CIA undercover agent and does not suffer any serious consequences (oh I know Judy lost her job with a $$ settlement). But Judy’s false reports and Novak’s report have “allegedly” damaged National Security and the results of printing false pre-war intelligence on humans lives (in Iraq) is catastrophic.

“Allegedly” in the A*P*C /rosen investigation (trial delayed for the sixth time) Rosen was taped saying that “he was so happy that the U.S. did not have an “official secrets act” as classified intelligence was being made available to him.

Why are journalist able to operate knowing that it is highly unlikely that they will be held accountable by the law?

i completely disagree… otherwise we are never going to know about things like rendition and secret prisons, nsa wiretapping in violation of fisa.

if reporters are allow to write stories on classified material – then all the gov has to do is classify their bad acts.

newspaperbrat @ 164

Take heart for when we reelect President Gore in 2008 the good General Clark would surely be among his first appointment to his new cabinet for who is more qualified for Secretary of Defense – a man the thinking citizens of our beleagured Republic’s can count on to clean up (out?) the rat nests Rummy and Shooter spawned throughout the DOD.

The new Gore Administration is destined to not only clean out the rat nests embedded in eight years years of the sociopathic, treasonous and most corrupt era in our history, President Gore will restore hope and dignity and peace globally.

ReElect President Al Gore in 2008. Accept no substitute!

Did you see the Time article yet? The drum beat will have to get louder for Gore to enter. It can be done, but it needs to be louder.

When I was a kid hanging out in newsrooms with my late great reporter Dad one of the frequent wise cracks these pros all seemed to favor and repeat often about TIME boiled down to: TIME – the rag for people too lazy to think for themselves – or knowing snark to that effect.

No amount of spin from MSM, DLC, RNC, etc. et al ad-nauseam could stop the momentum of a Gore run following the upcoming worldwide concert and fall Nobel Peace Prize well earned award. The next presidency is Gore’s if he chooses to run.

The great irony IMHO is the power of the internet and the little discussed but powerful reality that even the least privileged among our citizens as well as greatly privileged know Gore’s relection has moral dimensions. He was fairly elected once and poised to receive a historic landslide reelection in the happy event he chooses to enter the fray before the early 2008 primaries.

demi aka dmoore @ 152

But the garden gives back. Yes?

with gifts beyond compare. *g*

This flower is fabulous. You are too. It’s too hot to work out there now… I’m stayin’ in.
I have to go there Early! (talk to you later.)