More Moore Dishonesty?

[DavidJames]

Bears repeating.

And not exclusive to Moore. We have the likes of Hienz Kerry and Striesand who want us all to save energy and clean up the air or something along those lines but they have mansions and travel in private jets SUV's and limos and consume at a rate the rest of us can only dream of.

But hey, as long as they support environmental or liberal issues then they get to do so guilt free. It must be good to be rich and liberal.

Sorry for going off topic.

Maybe you should start a new thread. You choose which fits best

Strawman and why I feel the need to use them!
Conservation - I'll decide if you are doing enough, thank you
Thread Farts - they sure smell good to me

 

[RandFan]

Strawman and why I feel the need to use them!
Conservation - I'll decide if you are doing enough, thank you

Perahps you are right. If I'm going to off topic it should be in another thread. And it wouldn't be the first time I made a fallacious argument but I promise I try to avoid them.

So, are you saying there is no hypocricy on the part of Hienz Kerry or Striesand since I have arbitraily decided what constitutes "enough"? And is this the straw man you talk about?

Thanks,

RandFan

 

[aerocontrols]

Sneaky editing. Another good example of that would be the ad from Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: Kerry's crew is shown in the background while the foreground contains people saying "I served with Kerry." Viewers are led to believe that the people talking were under Kerry's command.

This photo?

That's a photo he put on display at the Democratic National Convention, and he showed it in one of his own ads. Those aren't his crew, those are his fellow officers. Since Swift Boats operated in packs, those men did serve with Kerry. Sometimes he led a group of swift boats, commanding some of these officers, sometimes he was in a group of swift boats commanded by one of them.

When the men who were present in that photo speak and the photo is behind them, their faces are highlighted. Most of the rest of the time other photos are in the background. I don't see the photo of Kerry's crew in the ad the Swift Vets are in.

MattJ

 

[Snide]

Bears repeating.

And not exclusive to Moore. We have the likes of Hienz Kerry and Striesand who want us all to save energy and clean up the air or something along those lines but they have mansions and travel in private jets SUV's and limos and consume at a rate the rest of us can only dream of.

But hey, as long as they support environmental or liberal issues then they get to do so guilt free. It must be good to be rich and liberal.

Sorry for going off topic.

Why would ad homs and strawmen bear repeating?

We also have rich folks complaining that paying the highest rate of income tax is not fair, who turn around complaining that liberals always cry, "no fair!"

We have people who are nothing more than rich (were born into wealth, or lucked their way, or exploited their way to it) who say, "Don't listen to those Hollywood types, they're nothing more than famous!"

We have people who want to dictate the type of sex you can have with your consensual adult partner, and then they cry, "You can't tax my inheritance...it's none of your business!"

I'm so sick of the "left" and the "right." I honestly thought you were too, Randfan. You and I are quite similar. Moderates who tend to lean to one side. I a little left, you a little right.

It is indeed good to be rich and liberal. Even better to be rich and conservative.

 

[RandFan]

Why would ad homs and strawmen bear repeating?

We also have rich folks complaining that paying the highest rate of income tax is not fair, who turn around complaining that liberals always cry, "no fair!"

We have people who are nothing more than rich (were born into wealth, or lucked their way, or exploited their way to it) who say, "Don't listen to those Hollywood types, they're nothing more than famous!"

We have people who want to dictate the type of sex you can have with your consensual adult partner, and then they cry, "You can't tax my inheritance...it's none of your business!"

I'm so sick of the "left" and the "right." I honestly thought you were too, Randfan. You and I are quite similar. Moderates who tend to lean to one side. I a little left, you a little right.

It is indeed good to be rich and liberal. Even better to be rich and conservative.

Hey Snide,

Fair critisisms. I do get tired of what I percieve as liberal hypocricy. As I said to David though it is not beyond me to make fallacious argument.

Thanks

 

[Snide]

God forbid that if Kerry is elected president, and I think he will be, he has any "unable to think" moments. I suppose we could assume that had he been president his brain would have worked differently. And to be fair it wasn't his responsibility to think. Still, one can't help but wonder if he would have indeed responded more quickly than Bush did?

I would wager that Kerry's mistake here was to overstate his reaction to the events of 9/11. I probably used some hyperbole myself, such as a feelings of "numbness" and "shock."

Speculation isn't worth much, but Kerry, McCain, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Mondale, Ford....all probably would have figured out a way to politely and resonably excuse themselves upon hearing the news.

That said, the criticism of how Bush dealt with those 7 minutes amounts to less than a hill of beans in my book.

 

[crimresearch]

"...I'm so sick of the "left" and the "right."..."


Snide's observation about being moderate also bears repeating.

No matter how many claims are advanced that refusing to overlook one side's hypocrisy mandates partisan motives, it ain't neccessarily so....


At least from a skeptical point of view.

 

[varwoche]

One of the things that has bothered me is the attention given to the fact that Bush didn't do anything for 7 minutes following the attacks. He sat and read a book. This is supposed to reveal something missing in Bush's character.

It is spoken of as so illustrative of Bush's inability to respond quickly as a leader. But then we find out.

God forbid that if Kerry is elected president, and I think he will be, he has any "unable to think" moments. I suppose we could assume that had he been president his brain would have worked differently. And to be fair it wasn't his responsibility to think. Still, one can't help but wonder if he would have indeed responded more quickly than Bush did?

This is a non-issue, probably unworthy of this .01 speculation....

Bush's non reaction impresses me as lame to a surreal extent. Whereas I suspect that Kerry, and most people in the same siutation, would have reacted appropriately.

 

[Snide]

"...I'm so sick of the "left" and the "right."..."


Snide's observation about being moderate also bears repeating.

No matter how many claims are advanced that refusing to overlook one side's hypocrisy mandates partisan motives, it ain't neccessarily so....

I must have take a stupid pill, but I'm not sure what your second sentence means.

And I'd like to add that I admittedly am left-leaning, so I am used to conservatives calling me a liberal, in spite of my agreement on such issues as, 1) taxes are too high, 2) we need less government, 3) welfare is being abused, etc...

Not sure why I felt the need to add that, though...

 

[Jocko]

This is a non-issue, probably unworthy of this .01 speculation....

Bush's non reaction impresses me as lame to a surreal extent. Whereas I suspect that Kerry, and most people in the same siutation, would have reacted appropriately.

And done what? Dove for the nearest phone booth to slip on the tights and cape?

After having read the full 9/11 commission report, particularly the timeline of events that morning, speculation about the "appropriate way" to spend those 7 minutes is utterly asinine. I recommend the timeline to anyone who thinks that the wheels of state just stopped turning for 7 minutes that day, because it just ain't so.

 

[Snide]

Hey Snide,

Fair critisisms. I do get tired of what I percieve as liberal hypocricy. As I said to David though it is not beyond me to make fallacious argument.

Thanks

Thank you, too. I don't like any hypocricy, but I think we need to be careful in identifying what is true hypocrisy.

Bruce Springsteen wanting higher taxes on the rich is not prima facie hypocrisy.

Paul McCartney wearing leather shoes is.

 

[varwoche]

And done what? Dove for the nearest phone booth to slip on the tights and cape?

After having read the full 9/11 commission report, particularly the timeline of events that morning, speculation about the "appropriate way" to spend those 7 minutes is utterly asinine. I recommend the timeline to anyone who thinks that the wheels of state just stopped turning for 7 minutes that day, because it just ain't so.

False dilemma. Just because Bush responded like a deer in the headlights doesn't mean that the government ground to a halt.

Nor does it mean there was neccesarily anything that he could have done.

Still, one expects a chief executive to be on top of things, taking action, making sure subordinates are doing their jobs, dealing with a myriad of ramifications. Especially during an unprecedented national emergency.

 

[BPSCG]

That said, the criticism of how Bush dealt with those 7 minutes amounts to less than a hill of beans in my book.

I'm a lot more interested in how he's dealt with the ensuing 35 months.

FWIW, I was at my desk here in Washington, DC when I heard Frannie over at the next desk holler, "A plane crashed into the World Trade Center." My reaction was, "Ooh, hope nobody was killed..." After all, a B-17 had crashed into the Empire State Building during WW II, and it's still there (the building, I mean). I figured it was a small plane, and honestly, a terror attack just didn't occur to me. And I went back to my work.

What did they tell Bush? That a plane had crashed into the WTC and they were looking into it? Or that terrorists had crashed it (not a rhetorical question - I don't know)?

 

[Jocko]

False dilemma. Just because Bush responded like a deer in the headlights doesn't mean that the government ground to a halt.

Nor does it mean there was neccesarily anything that he could have done.

Still, one expects a chief executive to be on top of things, taking action, making sure subordinates are doing their jobs, dealing with a myriad of ramifications. Especially during an unprecedented national emergency.

Point taken on the halted government remark. But you didn't answer my question: reacted how, and to what benefit? On the one had you say that's not the issue, but then you demean the reaction as deer-in-the-headlights, returning it to importance. What does "one" expect from such a situation, even with the advantage of 20/20 hindsight?

I know you're too intelligent to demand some pointless, square-jawed leap to action, since it would have been nothing more than theatre and feel-good gestures are worthless. I likewise assume you understand nothing could be done that wasn't already in action (Again, I would urge you to read the full timeline. It's quite insightful).

So I'm having difficulty what you would have done, or expected him to do. Just "being on top of things" is pretty vague (and in many ways he was, after some phone calls before arriving at the school)... can you offer specifics?

 

[DavidJames]

I think this discussion really helps Bush. The concern over the 7 minute Bush thing is a waste of energy and diverts attention from the real issues for which Bush should be held accountable.

 

[Snide]

I'm a lot more interested in how he's dealt with the ensuing 35 months.

Same here.

FWIW, I was at my desk here in Washington, DC when I heard Frannie over at the next desk holler, "A plane crashed into the World Trade Center." My reaction was, "Ooh, hope nobody was killed..." After all, a B-17 had crashed into the Empire State Building during WW II, and it's still there (the building, I mean). I figured it was a small plane, and honestly, a terror attack just didn't occur to me. And I went back to my work.

Same thing went through my mind when I heard it on the morning radio show I was listening to while driving into work. Then they reported the second plane, and the first words entering my head were, "bin Laden." (As a funny aside, a guy I know once asked me, "Had you ever even heard of the guy before 9/11?" I looked at him with the same look I gave to the girl who once asked me, "Before John Lennon died, did you ever even hear of the Beatles?" I don't talk politics with this guy anymore. )

What did they tell Bush? That a plane had crashed into the WTC and they were looking into it? Or that terrorists had crashed it (not a rhetorical question - I don't know)?

Bush was told about the first plane before meeting the school children. The "7 minutes" occurred after being told of the second plane.

From Michael Moore's site (sorry, it's the first source I could think of where I knew I could find it):

“At 9:05 a.m., the White House chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., stepped into the classroom and whispered into the president's right ear, ‘A second plane hit the other tower, and America's under attack.’” David E. Sanger and Don Van Natta Jr., “After The Attacks: The Events; In Four Days, A National Crisis Changes Bush's Presidency,” The New York Times, September 16, 2001.

 

[varwoche]

Point taken on the halted government remark. But you didn't answer my question: reacted how, and to what benefit? On the one had you say that's not the issue, but then you demean the reaction as deer-in-the-headlights, returning it to importance. What does "one" expect from such a situation, even with the advantage of 20/20 hindsight?

I know you're too intelligent to demand some pointless, square-jawed leap to action, since it would have been nothing more than theatre and feel-good gestures are worthless. I likewise assume you understand nothing could be done that wasn't already in action (Again, I would urge you to read the full timeline. It's quite insightful).

So I'm having difficulty what you would have done, or expected him to do. Just "being on top of things" is pretty vague (and in many ways he was, after some phone calls before arriving at the school)... can you offer specifics?

I was right in my original sentence and you're right now -- it's not worth debating and I retract my idle speculation.

 

[BPSCG]

Bush was told about the first plane before meeting the school children. The "7 minutes" occurred after being told of the second plane.

From Michael Moore's site (sorry, it's the first source I could think of where I knew I could find it):

'Sokay - just don't let it happen again

Kinda wish he'd made some innocuous excuse to the kids and left, but again, I'm more concerned with what he's done since then, and on that score, I think he's done well.

FWIW, I read somewhere the principal of the school involved apparently thought he handled it well. Still, again, this registers about a .01 on a 0-100 scale (even the Bush haters here seem mostly to agree with us right-thinkers, for once).