Comments on: Media Indictment: Confusing Dissent With Disloyalty

By: egregious

egregious — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:35:46 +0000

woid — fixed, and thank you

By: woid

woid — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:28:52 +0000

Not to nit-pick, but…

Edward R. MURROW.

By: earlofhuntingdon

earlofhuntingdon — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:24:29 +0000

I like that fresh bottle of Macallan part. Preferably 12 or 16-year old.

By: victoria

victoria — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:56:45 +0000

“If this is true, if the president intentionally ignored data refuting the existence of Saddam’s WMDs, he should be impeached.”

LS, I agree with Sullivan, but Bush intentionally ignored the PDB Bin Laden determined to strike US. That should warrant impeachment as well.

What the hell is wrong with Conyers and Pelosi???

By: leftdcin72

leftdcin72 — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:34:15 +0000

As if the mass media institutions would only work harder, we would all be better off, an endless meaningless tautology. Katie Couric, who reads 12 minutes of news off a teleprompter against 18 minutes of ads in her thirty minutes or the NYT and Judith Miller. The decline and fall of this mass media may fairly be tied to the decline and fall of the Clintons, disbarred lawyer and HRC who has no more to add to the public discourse than Katie Couric or Bill O’Reilly. No wonder that the insitutional electronic media nightly news, so fondly supported by the Clintons (Communications Act of 1996) has fallen in viewership from approximately 40 million since 1993 to approximately 18 million today. May the same fate be accorded to the Clintons.

By: yonodeler

yonodeler — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:28:12 +0000

At least Scott McClellan is being labeled a traitor before he testifies under oath. Thank you to the labelers.

Scott, you’ve crossed the Rubicon. There’s no way to get back across, and midstream you would get swept away. Keep coming with the truth, without feeling obligated to voice political positions, and you’ll attract friends who’ll help you along.

By: siri

siri — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:26:14 +0000

Good morning to the Lake. Will FDL be live blogging that meeting tomorrow? I’m a huge meeting hater from way back, but of course, care about THIS one. I understand it’ll be a media circus, and some are live blogging it. I’ze just wondering if FDL will be there or keeping an eye on CSpan. Thanks.

By: LS

LS — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:25:49 +0000

I was surprised by Sullivan’s call for impeachment though…

By: perris

perris — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:10:06 +0000

like we didn’t allready know he not only ignored that data but that in fact he deliberately hid it.

the man is a criminal, a war criminal, there are no two ways to look at this

of course his base will say this isn’t true but if the president claimed water is dry his base would have to agree with that too

By: LS

LS — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:06:43 +0000

” “Rather than open this Pandora’s Box, the administration chose a different path — not employing out-and-out deception, but shading the truth,” he wrote of the effort to convince the world that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, an effort he said used “innuendo and implication” and “intentional ignoring of intelligence to the contrary.”

“President Bush managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option,” McClellan concluded, noting, “The lack of candor underlying the campaign for war would severely undermine the president’s entire second term in office.”

If this is true, if the president intentionally ignored data refuting the existence of Saddam’s WMDs, he should be impeached.”
(my bold/LS)

Andrew Sullivan.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlan.....-grav.html