NationStates Jolt Archive

I personally enjoyed Tony Snow's exchange with Mr. Gregory yesterday claiming that he was being partisan in his quoting of the Iraq survey group. After all, according to Mr. Snow, that Iraq survey group was supposed to be nonpartisan. Does this guy ever run out of bullshit from which to spew? At what point will he just throw up his hands ad say "Fuck it, this guy is the idiot you claim him to be?" Is calling someone partisan equvelant to the race card at this stage of the game? Pull it out and everyone has to back off. Tony snow has really become more of a joke than anyone preceeding him. Good job Tony.

Politicking is delightful, no?

"Partisan" is another way of saying, "You're bringing up something that contradicts my world view."

All sides use the word when it is convenient to do so.

"Partisan" is another way of saying, "You're bringing up something that contradicts my world view."

All sides use the word when it is convenient to do so.

I just think it's funny. After all this was a bipartisan committe that came up with these recommendations. After all the chief member in charge is the Bush company man and loyal companion. I just find it hilarious how close were are comming to dystopian doublespeak in our current world. Things have progressively become worse, but we're at a frick zenith right now. Tony Snow could walk out naked now and insist he has pants on. "You're partisan for saying I don't have pants. Do you like my pants?"

I just think it's funny. After all this was a bipartisan committe that came up with these recommendations. After all the chief member in charge is the Bush company man and loyal companion. I just find it hilarious how close were are comming to dystopian doublespeak in our current world. Things have progressively become worse, but we're at a frick zenith right now. Tony Snow could walk out naked now and insist he has pants on. "You're partisan for saying I don't have pants. Do you like my pants?"

If you live long enough, you'll hear just about every politician do that.

You don't remember "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is"? (and you have to admit, even if you like Clinton, that was pretty silly to say)

You don't remember "peace in our time"? (one of the funniest British jokes of all time)

Plenty of historical examples.

If you live long enough, you'll hear just about every politician do that.

You don't remember "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is"? (and you have to admit, even if you like Clinton, that was pretty silly to say)

You don't remember "peace in our time"? (one of the funniest British jokes of all time)

Plenty of historical examples.

the is statement was totally hilarious. I rather enjoyed playing that one over in my head and having a good laugh. The difference here is that Clinton eventually took responsibility for his actions and made some sort of attempt to heal the wounds. He didn't wait years to do it either. When will Bush admit he has been dead wrong on... well just about everything? Some humility would be appreciated. Clinton had his faults and was in no way perfect, but Bush makes him look like a fricken scion of hope and glory.

Just remember where Tony Snow worked before coming to the White House: Fox News, the people who brought you "Mark Foley D-FL" a few months ago.

the is statement was totally hilarious. I rather enjoyed playing that one over in my head and having a good laugh. The difference here is that Clinton eventually took responsibility for his actions and made some sort of attempt to heal the wounds. He didn't wait years to do it either. When will Bush admit he has been dead wrong on... well just about everything? Some humility would be appreciated. Clinton had his faults and was in no way perfect, but Bush makes him look like a fricken scion of hope and glory.

Some politicians are better at being self-deprecating than others - and some take themselves far too seriously.

As an example, down the road I see Hillary being wildly successful - but having none of her husband's ability to be self-deprecating and charming.

Just remember where Tony Snow worked before coming to the White House: Fox News, the people who brought you "Mark Foley D-FL" a few months ago.

yeah, and then they did it again 2 weeks later with the Noe and Nay scandals. A bit of wishful thinking I presume.

yeah, and then they did it again 2 weeks later with the Noe and Nay scandals. A bit of wishful thinking I presume.

I missed that one. I do recall that when we had a thread about the Foley gaff there were people here foaming at the mouth about how it was just a mistake. Yeah. What was it read just the other day about an internal memo at Fox News telling reporters to refer to the newly chosen Democratic House Majority Leader as a "political hack" and to play up the "infighting" among the Democrats while avoiding mention of similar leadeship contests among the Republicans. :rolleyes:

yeah, and then they did it again 2 weeks later with the Noe and Nay scandals. A bit of wishful thinking I presume.

They did? I thought they only did it with Chafee after the Foley bit. I think if they did it AGAIN with another scandal it proved something to those naysayers in the thread about the Foley bit who said it was a mistake.

"Partisan" is another way of saying, "You're bringing up something that contradicts my world view."

All sides use the word when it is convenient to do so.
Holy false equivalency, Batman! :rolleyes:

You don't remember "peace in our time"? (one of the funniest British jokes of all time)There's a bit more to that story. Chamberlain did buy the British time. At the time of the Munich conference, the UK and France had much less of an airforce than they did when the war started, and building the RAF and the RADAR network was something that Chamberlain pursued. Imagine how close the Battle of Britain was and then imagine what might have happened if the scales had been tipped in Hitler's favor. And then there's still the issue about Chamberlain being briefed by Churchill during the war...

There's a bit more to that story. Chamberlain did buy the British time. At the time of the Munich conference, the UK and France had much less of an airforce than they did when the war started, and building the RAF and the RADAR network was something that Chamberlain pursued. Imagine how close the Battle of Britain was and then imagine what might have happened if the scales had been tipped in Hitler's favor. And then there's still the issue about Chamberlain being briefed by Churchill during the war...
I didn't realize it until I did some reading recently on WWII, but before the war started, Germany was easily the most powerful combined military/economic country on earth. Most of the countries who would become the Allies had disarmed a lot before the war started. Chamberlain bought time, and it's a good thing, too. Hell, if Hitler hadn't been such a maniac and a shitty tactician, Britain would likely have fallen not long after France did.

Holy false equivalency, Batman! :rolleyes:

"It's not partisan if our side does it" eh?

"It's not partisan if our side does it" eh?
You know, if you give an example, I'd probably agree with it. I'm not a fool--I know partisanship extends all across the spectrum. But you didn't do that.

You know, if you give an example, I'd probably agree with it. I'm not a fool--I know partisanship extends all across the spectrum. But you didn't do that.

If you know it extends across the spectrum, then you know the word is used just to bash people who happen to bring up inconvenient points.

It's so common an example is not necessary.

If you know it extends across the spectrum, then you know the word is used just to bash people who happen to bring up inconvenient points.

It's so common an example is not necessary.
Bullshit. There are plenty of examples of legitimate partisanship. It is not the catchall you're making it out to be. The way Snow used it is bullshit. A legitimate example from the Democratic side would be one of Olbermann's special commentaries. That's partisanship. Gregory was practicing journalism.

I really am starting to wonder if the bullshit response from the white house is so deeply ingrained that at this late point, where it can accomplish nothing and probably serves to further undermine Bush's credibility, it continues unconsciously.

Being sleazy and gung-ho about iraq isnt winning any more elections, it is clear that there is no success, why do they continue?

I really am starting to wonder if the bullshit response from the white house is so deeply ingrained that at this late point, where it can accomplish nothing and probably serves to further undermine Bush's credibility, it continues unconsciously.

Being sleazy and gung-ho about iraq isnt winning any more elections, it is clear that there is no success, why do they continue?

Because they don't know any better? Or because if you keep at it, instead of giving up (or spin it so it looks like your idea), the public will be too stupid to care or notice.

I feel the Bush admin will take the report and necromagically spin it to look like this was Bush's idea all along.

I really am starting to wonder if the bullshit response from the white house is so deeply ingrained that at this late point, where it can accomplish nothing and probably serves to further undermine Bush's credibility, it continues unconsciously.

Being sleazy and gung-ho about iraq isnt winning any more elections, it is clear that there is no success, why do they continue?

Because stopping would be a tacit admission that they were wrong to begin with. Look at how they handled the "stay the course" thing, they said they'd never said that. The President of the United States appears incapable of admitting that he made a mistake, and for that, nearly 3,000 more Americans have died on top of the nearly 3,000 killed on September 11th. Brilliant.

Bullshit. There are plenty of examples of legitimate partisanship. It is not the catchall you're making it out to be. The way Snow used it is bullshit. A legitimate example from the Democratic side would be one of Olbermann's special commentaries. That's partisanship. Gregory was practicing journalism.

Correct, how dare Gregory ask a question which may have resulted in a response as to whethere his presumption was correct or not. The point being tat Gregory made a comment after reading several quotes that I'll now paraphrase..."You fucked up the pre-war, the beginning of the war, the middle, and the now(end)" and this was from a "nonpartisan group." He then asked if that can be seen as anything less than a failure. Instead of answering the question Snow said "You're partisan." He didn't present how the information could in any stretch of the imagination show Bush in a glimmer of favorable light. The report basically calls him the most gigantic failure since the history of..... well ever. So how is asking a question by an journalist partisan? They didn't even let Hellen Thomas bite into Tony's ass because she would have devoured him.

Correct, how dare Gregory ask a question which may have resulted in a response as to whethere his presumption was correct or not. The point being tat Gregory made a comment after reading several quotes that I'll now paraphrase..."You fucked up the pre-war, the beginning of the war, the middle, and the now(end)" and this was from a "nonpartisan group." He then asked if that can be seen as anything less than a failure. Instead of answering the question Snow said "You're partisan." He didn't present how the information could in any stretch of the imagination show Bush in a glimmer of favorable light. The report basically calls him the most gigantic failure since the history of..... well ever. So how is asking a question by an journalist partisan? They didn't even let Hellen Thomas bite into Tony's ass because she would have devoured him.

Realisticly Bush will go down as the most inept ever. EVER! When the odds are slanted at 98% fuck up and 2% success (I'm being nice) why don't you just admit once that you are wrong. That somehow the voice of God you heard in your head to attack Afghanistan and Iraq was a bad acid flashback? Seriously, I bet if you asked Tony Snow if it was true Bush invented oxygen he would argue your partisan ass that he sure did and you're lucky to breathe it.

Because stopping would be a tacit admission that they were wrong to begin with. Look at how they handled the "stay the course" thing, they said they'd never said that. The President of the United States appears incapable of admitting that he made a mistake, and for that, nearly 3,000 more Americans have died on top of the nearly 3,000 killed on September 11th. Brilliant.

The election basically said "you were wrong to begin with," the Iraq Study Group just released a report which, to the same extent as 'pulling out,' would indicate we are "wrong to begin with."

Everyone already knows we were wrong to begin with - the idea of iraq being a good thing isnt winning any more elections - so why continue?

I mark it down to either force of habit or actual belief on bush's part- and I always thought him 8/10ths criminal and 2/10ths fool. This is making me rethink that assessment.