I would love to see Galloway on Hardball or read the transcript but at the site you need Quicktime, which I HAVE REPEATEDLY UNSUCCESSFULL DOWNLOADED OVER AND OVER.
HELP!!!!!!!
Posted by debcoop at May 18, 2005 01:10 AMDocumenting the Atrocities:
Your suggestion on documenting the words and actions of the Repubs is really important, but the project is much to vast for any member of our half-vast liberal conspiracy.
A topic by topic breakdown, undertaken by a group of independent blogger-type people is a possible solution. The outrages are simply too big, too often, and too complicated to do alone.
I'd sure hate to be the historian 30 years from now trying to make sense of this political era. The volume of word-stuff produced is overwhelming.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at May 18, 2005 01:28 AMEriposte, there was *no* sloppy reporting, period. Isikoff called his reliable source, the source said he had seen the Koran in the toilet bit in the upcoming report, Isikoff ran it by 2 other sources at the Pentagon, *neither one challenged the charge*, Isikoff went ahead and published it, saying a White House source told him. Then he calls the source back and the source says that maybe it was in some other documents and not in the report itself. So what? What difference does it make? Where's the sloppy reporting? You see any? Does anyone see any? Furthermore, it obviously occurred anyway, as we have numerous other reports of these same incidents. Come on man, please.
Posted by Robert Lindsay at May 18, 2005 02:50 AMRobert Lindsay is right--and I hate to defend Isikoff because I'll never forgive him for what he did to Clinton--but this was not a case of sloppy reporting. Either Isikoff was set up by Rove, or someone put pressure on his source to lie after the story was in print.
Posted by Susan S at May 18, 2005 04:09 AMs th slmcrckrs bcm frnzd whn thr nhly wrt s slld, s th lft s dstrght whn thr hllwd prdcls r mlgnd.
[Editor: ignore=off]Susan and Robert, you both are absolutely correct.
If we have figured out Rove's play book, then why in the hell can't the media? That's twice now. Let's see if the media falls for it a third time. Hopefully, one day the media wakes up and realizes they are in the same boat with us. Just like those Democrats who betrayed our Party principals, this Administration will turn on them too.
Posted by Judith at May 18, 2005 05:44 AMHey debcoop!
Have you tyried installing Quicktime Alternative yet? It's based on Window Media player 6, and has proven to be as easy to use as Quicktime, but without all of the annoying requests to actually pay for the software.
Do a Google search for "Quicktime Alternative" to find other download sites. And there's a Real Alternative player that you can use instead of RealPlayer, too...
===============
Oh, yeah: Religiously Insane Troll-Boy,
As the Bible Thumpers become frenzied when their unholy writ is sullied, so the right is distraught when their unbridled hypocrisy is challenged.
I wonder what would happen if I went into a church and started ripping pages out of the Bible and wiping my ass with them? Not that that piece of godless fiction is even worth anything as toilet paper IMO, mind you...
Posted by (: Tom :) at May 18, 2005 06:23 AMWhy doesn't Isakoff "out" his "confidential source"? After all, isn't there an implicit contract that goes "I'll protect your identidy as long as you give me correct information. If you leave me twisting in the wind, I'll do the same to you". Who's he protecting, and why?
Posted by Oaklander at May 18, 2005 06:29 AM"If we have figured out Rove's play book, then why in the hell can't the media?" Judith, where have you been? The Media is well aware of Rove's play book, they are IN ON IT. The Media is the actuator of the play book; they make it work.
Posted by T2 at May 18, 2005 06:31 AMOT, Orin Hatch just said that "the Democrat (sic) goal is to make abortion the centerfold of our lives." What the fuck?
Posted by Susan S at May 18, 2005 06:46 AMRead the Howler extract:
SEELYE (5/17/05): Mark Whitaker, editor of Newsweek, said in an interview that the magazine was retracting the part of the article saying sources told Newsweek that a coming military report would say interrogators had flushed a holy book down the toilet to unnerve detainees. As it turned out, Newsweek now says, there was one source. And Mr. Whitaker said that because that source had ''backed away'' from his original account, the magazine could ''no longer stand by'' it.
As we've told you, your modern ''press corps'' has many slippery techniques for making weak stories seem stronger. (No one knows this any better than Seelye.) One of the slickest techniques was put in play here - the turning of one into many. Newsweek now says it had one source; in its original item, it claimed it had ''sources.'' This pluralization of the single is a familiar press corps technique, and it's the mark of a cheat-of a fake, a dissembler. And by the way, these dissembling techniques have been widely used for the past dozen years against an array of Big Dems.
Look, if Isikoff believes his source intentionally fed him some stuff that was wrong, he should out him. But my reference to "sloppiness" is based largely on the Howler comments. Other than that I think Isikoff made a mistake. But I've pointed out clearly that one does not need Isikoff's report because there are several other reports on the same thing.
I'm just saying that if a journalist made a mistake, it should be noted. That doesn't mean that the incident reported never happened.
I am fully aware of the Rathergate similarities and Steve already mentioned that in my earlier post.
Posted by eriposte at May 18, 2005 07:15 AMWho cares about Iskoff? He was a hack in the Clinton Era, he was a shill for George, and now he's getting smacked for jumping ahead of the changing winds of the media. The reality is that the Bill is coming due, the long knives the british promised during abu ghraib are now out. They gave us an election to handle it and we didn't. Call the lies lies. Call the facists facists, scream loud and scream now, before you are all screaming from Tehran in August.
The bill has come due and the smart media know now its time to follow the blood in the water to dinner. Overstep after Overstep, could this administration lower the bar any farther? Its time to get the key people out of editorships, and news room control. I understand Ted Turner would love to give Bill Moyers a cable channel, and get revenge on the morons who pushed him out of broadcast...
When they bark the loudest is when they are the WEAKEST. Now is the time to go for the jugular not to back down.
Posted by patience at May 18, 2005 07:49 AMWho's systematically documenting this history today (in one place) for all to see, so that America can see the real nature of these so-called "patriots"
My friend, it's obvious. You are, we are. These are the new "Federalist Papers" only online. As long as these electronic files live and people have access to them the history of these times lives on. The only thing that someone need to do is hit "print" to archive a hard copy, and bind them.
I wonder what would happen if I went into a church and started ripping pages out of the Bible and wiping my ass with them?
Tom, I've seen the moron trolls wheeling this out. I can tell you exactly what would happen. If I went to a church, dropped trou' and took a shit, then ripped up a bible and wiped my ass with it a series of events would occur: The police would be called; they would get an emergency order of detention; within 72 hours I would see a judge for a sanity hearing; if found insane I would be held in a mental facility, if not found insane I would be incarcerated and charged with several crimes that would put me in prison up to 5 years.
But it's the wrong metaphor to use. The real question is, "What would happen if a foreign army came to your church, shit on the bible, and 'disappeared' and tortured christians...often till dead, and had pictures of it." Both you and I know what the response would be.
Posted by phidipides at May 18, 2005 09:07 AMWhat gets me is that the rest of the world wouldn't believe us no matter the truth or the stories. After Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, 'rendition' and all, no one would trust us to tell them what really happened.
We have maxed out our world-opinion credit card, no one is offering us a new one, and the payments are coming due.
I didn't max out the card, but they did it in my name, dammit!
Ed
phidipides - Wow! I hadn't thought it out that far.
But:
1. What exactly would I be detained for? I have done nothing illegal.
2. Why would my sanity be questioned? What actions of mine are considered insane?
3. what crimes did I commit? I can understand once theofascists like Bendeco start writing the laws (as opposed to performing their standard judicial activism in prejudicial support of their fellow theofascists) that I would be charged with heresy by thought, heresy by word, and heresy by deed. What laws are currently out there to persecute me?
Posted by (: Tom :) at May 18, 2005 10:44 AM