Aug
1

Powerline: The Embarrassment Would Long Since Have Killed Weaker Men




Posted at 17:45 by Gavin M.

The Minnesota Minge Ninjas have stepped in it again, this time in their socks.

Dingell: What’s Wrong With Hezbollah?

Yesterday, Representative John Dingell of Michigan appeared on a Detroit television program along with Republican Candice Miller. They discussed the crisis in Lebanon; Dingell proclaimed himself neutral. “I don’t take sides for or against Hezbollah; I don’t take sides for or against Israel.” Asked, “You’re not against Hezbollah?” Dingell answers, “No…”

Listen to it here on YouTube, or use our player below.

If the Democrats win control of the House of Representatives, Dingell will be the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He was one of the eight Democrats who did not vote in favor of the Congressional resolution supporting Israel in its conflict with Hezbollah.

Here’s that YouTube clip (and that’s our emphasis, above):

But what’s this? Here’s part of Dingell’s last remark that mysteriously got cut off, before the clip popped up on Redstate.org (“It’s good to know terrorist groups have at least one supporter in the House. How many others are there and can we afford to find out by letting them take control of the House?”), and metastasized to Pamalamaland (“Folks please pass this on to your neighbors, co-workers, anyone. We are in the fight of our lives. And the jihad is the defining issue of our times”), and then to Powerline, where bad ideas so often go to die.

Q: You’re not against Hezbollah?

DINGELL: No, I happen to be — I happen to be against violence, I think the United States has to bring resolution to this matter. Now, I condemn Hezbollah as does everybody else, for the violence.

Huh. Dingell was actually advancing a bone-standard ‘honest broker’ position, and someone or another posted a doctored recording trying to fool people. (Full video and transcript here. Hanx: Judd at Think Progress.)

AssrocketAssrocket.jpg
John ‘Assrocket’ Hinderaker: A Fool for All Seasons

Waiting for that correction, John. Holding our breath ’til we turn blue. [Hhfp!]

Bonus million: Did Hinderaker totally rip off this passage without attribution, or what?

Redstate:

Remember, should the Democrats take over the House of Representatives, Dingell would chair the Energy and Commerce Committee. Dingell is also one of only eight, count ‘em, EIGHT, Democrats who did not chose to vote in favor of the recent House Resolution supporting Israel against terrorist aggression.

Powerline:

If the Democrats win control of the House of Representatives, Dingell will be the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He was one of the eight Democrats who did not vote in favor of the Congressional resolution supporting Israel in its conflict with Hezbollah.

Note how his alterations remove the livelier bits from the passage, leaving it like a greige-hued room with no plants or furniture. Laziness, thy name is John. Best Hindy steal since he grabbed that Gene Krupa video from us a few weeks ago.

86 Comments »

  1. BillyD said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:04

    Attention Sadly, No! heathens!!! Prepare for C1K!!! The interweb apocolypse is nye!!

  2. b said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:15

    Clearly the fax machines that provide their talking points are working overtime:

    http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2006/07/jihad_congressm.html

    “If the Democrats take control of the house in November, Dingell will be the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He’s one of the jihad eight (Democrats of course) that did not vote for a resolution supporting Israel.”

  3. mikey said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:22

    Whenever I see this kind of blatent dishonesty in Right Blogistan, I always think the same thing. They get away with it. Always. No consequences. None. If we tried it, we’d be castigated unto the gates of hell. Now, why is that?

    mikey

  4. MCH said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:26

    My guess, Mikey, is that bitter, hateful paranoids nursing grudges will always have more time, effort, and motivation left to spend on blogfighting long after people with anything better to do have moved on.

  5. Nim, ham hock of liberty said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:28

    The devil’s in the ellipses, ain’t he.

  6. BillyD said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:31

    It’s funny because this is the kind of thing wingnuts try to project on most media outlets.

  7. BillyD said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:32

    By that, I mean this kind of blatant deception being passed off as fact.

  8. Bloated Plutocrats » Blog Archive » We write letters said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:40

    [...] Via TP; S,N!; Atrios.  Explore posts in the same categories: Wingnuts [...]

  9. konopelli/wgg said,

    August 1, 2006 at 18:45

    There seems to be no honor among dweebs.

  10. Skeptic said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:08

    This is exactly why most of the popular wingnut blogs don’t have comments sections. They wouldn’t want their readers to know that they are full of crap and constantly make stuff up. Nor do they have any desire is correcting errors that advance their cause.

  11. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:09

    After viewing the exchange in full over at Think Progress, I have to agree that it was rather dishonest to cut off Mr. Dingell’s remarks at the point where he said no. As pointed out at TP, Dingell condemned Hezbollah for using violence but was suggesting the US should approach the situation without taking sides. That view can be argued against without the cheesy truncation of his comments. It would have also been better, in my opinion, to point out how the rest of the interview consisted of Dingell putting forth a bunch of empty rhetoric and platitudes.

    Frankly, I’m a bit shocked that such a high profile site such as Powerline would participate in what appears to be a coordinated disinformation campaign. The most charitable explanation for this is that he didn’t verify the full remarks before running with it. Think Progress suggests sending email requesting a correction be made on the site. I think that’s a good idea.

  12. random_guy said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:20

    Frankly, I’m a bit shocked that such a high profile site such as Powerline would participate in what appears to be a coordinated disinformation campaign.

    You haven’t been reading Sadly, No! for long, have you Bill?

  13. s9 said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:20

    Rush Limbaugh ran the doctored audio clip at the top of his radio program this morning. This one was pushed quite deliberately from high up in the wingnut klavern hierarchy.

  14. ron said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:29

    meanwhile the wingnut blogosphere is all atwitter claiming that Hezbollah (with the complicity of the liberal media of course) staged qana.

  15. Gregor Samsa said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:34

    Repent for C1K is near. These are the last days.

  16. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:42

    random_guy said,
    You haven’t been reading Sadly, No! for long, have you Bill?

    Actually, yes I have (though rarely commenting). I also regularly read Powerline, which is why this is so surprising to me. While I understand there are disagreements over the substance of political debates, this isn’t really one of those situations. While there can be differences of opinion on facts that are presented, only part of the conversation was noted. That’s just plain dishonest. It probably began with someone way down on the food chain putting it together and shooting it out through email or fax and then there was a hurry to get it posted without verifying. Ideally this will be explained in any correction issued.

    In the interest of full disclosure I have to confess that on the substance of most political issues I’m more in agreement with Powerline and other right of center sites than I am with this one, but I believe it’s counterproductive to engage in debate based on half-truths.

    PS The reason I’m commenting on this here is because I just happened to be on this site and noticed it. :)

  17. Crooks and Liars » This is not surprising said,

    August 1, 2006 at 19:57

    [...] Powerline uses a chopped up video to attack Dingel falsely. The right wingers had a field day with it. TP has it also  [...]

  18. Robert Green said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:03

    bill

    there are literally tens of examples of powerline doing the very thing you are “surprised” by in the last 3 years. possibly hundreds. republican drones at either RNC HQ or at AEI or wherever send out a blast fax (which these days is actually an e-mail, but whatever) with the day’s talking points. oddly, those very points are propounded on TV by various republican consultants and/or administration officials, and with this i have no problem: it makes for good fodder for “The Daily Show” when you see eight people say the thing on 8 different shows using the exact same words.

    but here we have, in powerline, allegedly thoughtful independent minds who just happend to come the very same conclusions as the RNC wants them to. huh. and it happens on most of the most popular hard right websites. huh. weird. and here they are, not disclosing it. and over and over, the spin that the RNC sends out teeters on the brink of flat out lie, or goes over that edge. and powerline et al do nothing to research the claims.

    and all of this has been exposed over and over by various internetizens, in many magazines and so on.

    and you, you innocent little churl you, are shocked, shocked, by such a thing.

    sorry bill, it just makes you seem like an idiot or an asshole.

    i’m going with both.

  19. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:17

    Robert Green said,
    there are literally tens of examples of powerline doing the very thing you are “surprised� by in the last 3 years. possibly hundreds. republican drones at either RNC HQ or at AEI or wherever send out a blast fax (which these days is actually an e-mail, but whatever) with the day’s talking points.

    I understand that you believe there have been all those (hundreds!!) examples at Powerline and elsewhere and that it’s all part of a grand conspiracy. I don’t share that view, and I also don’t believe this kind of political organizing and getting out a “unified message” is the exclusive domain of the GOP.

    I also somewhat understand your need to attack me personally for not sharing your views. I get the same thing when I disagree with those giving me the latest updates on alien abductions, crop circles, and Sasquatch sightings. :)

  20. NobodySpecial said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:38

    I understand that you believe there have been all those (hundreds!!) examples at Powerline and elsewhere and that it’s all part of a grand conspiracy. I don’t share that view, and I also don’t believe this kind of political organizing and getting out a “unified message� is the exclusive domain of the GOP.

    Who is the liberal Bill O’Reilly? What is the ‘liberal’ TV network with ‘liberal’ commentators repeating the exact same talking points? Surely you MUST have examples if you want to make this kind of claim.

  21. Alex said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:44

    The real idiocy is that there IS NOTHING WRONG WITH SAYING “NO” TO THAT QUESTION. By saying NO to the negative question, Dingel is saying he is “against” Hezbollah.

  22. Jefe said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:46

    This latest post from Powerline is really strange:

    Michael Ledeen knits. Ledeen does … jam … the throbbing … party. Ledeen focuses on the White House … beating.

    I’m not really sure what this means.

  23. Brian C.B. said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:49

    Not attacking you personally, with this comment, Bill, but the grand conspiracy to which you refer is referred to as “public relations.” There is a concerted effort to get everyone talking using the same frame and on the same topic. As the popularity of the Bush Administration has faded, the Republicans’ Party leadership has come to rely more and more on moving its political base to the polls, and the party media organs have become more and more monomaniacal and, to be blunt, desperate. The twisting and mass publication of a banal Francine Busby comment during the special election in California, and now this, makes for a fine example. Several media outlets, one of them Rush Limbaugh, if the comment above is to be believed, use the same cut clip, one drawn from a longer interview in which a Representative voices support for a non-partisan broker role for the US in the Middle East. And do this rather than respond to the substance of the argument. This is a coincidence? And is it a service to America and, frankly, the state of Israel to characterize supporters of a nonpartisan American brokerage that settles territorial claims and provides security guarantees in such a fashion? Because, some of the people making this argument are wandering pretty close to an apology for genocide or mass-murder in the next paragraph or breath.

  24. Smiling Mortician said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:51

    I understand that you believe there have been all those (hundreds!!) examples at Powerline and elsewhere and that it’s all part of a grand conspiracy. I don’t share that view

    The problem with the above statements, Bill, is that you’re seeing the issue in terms of beliefs and views, when Robert’s post was about facts. The difference is that facts are verifiable. They can be proven true or false — it’s not a belief that Powerline has posted many adulterated versions of the comments of liberals. It’s not a view. It’s a fact — easily verifiable by observing the evidence.

    Your statement is rather like saying “I know you believe that Redstate called Dingell a supporter of terrorist groups, but I don’t share that view.” No. No belief involved, no view involved. It’s just a fact.

  25. Joe Wilson said,

    August 1, 2006 at 20:51

    Let them have their fun.

    They are not happy unless they attack someone.

    Blood thirsty failed Americans.

  26. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:06

    Smiling Mortician, Brian C.B, et al

    I’ve heard your arguments before and all I can say is it’s just more Sasquatch sightings. I’m willing to accept that you see things differently than I do, and given the venue I’m not going to try to convince you to agree with me. I just commented on the Dingell thing because I saw it as an example of shady politics. If it had be a Republican sitting in Dingell’s chair I would have made the same observation.

  27. Docciavelli said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:24

    …it’s just more Sasquatch sightings.

    Really? I mean, Malkin, Coulter, O’Reilly and Hindrocket are pretty damn fugly, but I’ve never gone there.

    More to the point though, if you don’t think there’s a concerted right-wing message machine that works as an echo chamber, Bill, then you absolutely must take a look at this bridge I’d love to sell you…

  28. KnaveRupe said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:28

    So…. What’s with this new “reasonable” wingnuttage? While still as reality impaired as previous ones, Bill B. is nowhere near as entertaining as the S, N! trolls of yore.

    “Look at me! I am reasonable! I would say the same thing if it were a republican so misquoted! Yet I reject your so-called “facts” as sasquatch sightings!” just doesn’t have the same yuk value as “Cobagz!” or “The fact is…”

    Where have you gone, Annie Angel? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

  29. Arne Langsetmo said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:29

    Well, I guess we should just go public with His Emanence Rush singing “I’m a Nazi”. After all, it’s just Rush in his own words … with a little “reformatting” for clarity….

    Cheers,

  30. Max Renn said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:31

    Aww, Bill B the concern troll is so cute! Dance, monkey, dance! Bill B doesn’t like the contention that Powerline embodies ‘shady politics.’ Nor does Bill B address any of the issues raised in Brian CB’s comment.

    Bill B: you wouldn’t like him when he’s angry! A concern troll for the ages.

  31. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:33

    Docciavelli said,

    More to the point though, if you don’t think there’s a concerted right-wing message machine that works as an echo chamber…

    Of course there’s a rightwing message machine, though I don’t believe it’s as far reaching as some here do. I also know there’s a leftwing message machine, and boy howdy are there some leftwing echo chambers! The trick is recognizing when you’re caught in one. :)

  32. sohei said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:37

    Frankly, I’m a bit shocked that such a high profile site such as Powerline would participate in what appears to be a coordinated disinformation campaign.

    I know! It’s just crazy, isn’t it? What the hell kind of world are we living in, anyway, when you can’t even trust Time’s blog of the year to give it to you straight. Sheesh.

  33. fiver said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:38

    Bill B sez:
    Ideally this will be explained in any correction issued.

    Ahahahahahahahahahahaha…funniest thing I’ve read all day.

    Please don’t let any of us scare you away. We actually *do* like dissenting opinions around here.

    It’s a proven fact that the GOP sends out daily talking points. I don’t know if Powerline is connected with them in any official capacity, but they sure pick up on those talking points pretty fast. They also have a long track record of deliberately misleading their readers, via blatant dishonesty or shoddy logic.

    Fortunately for you, we live in the magical land of the internets, and all it takes is a Google search or two to clear things up.

  34. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:41

    sohei said,

    What the hell kind of world are we living in, anyway, when you can’t even trust Time’s blog of the year to give it to you straight.

    It’s a shame, isn’t it? Next thing you know there’ll be major network news organizations peddling phony memos and who knows what else! Yikes!

  35. fiver said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:51

    Yeah, damn those network news organizations and their peddling phony memos with accurate information in them! Especially when there’s plenty of other evidence that Bush skipped out on his National Guard service.

  36. NobodySpecial said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:55

    He could distinguish and divide
    A hair twixt South and South-West side
    On which, at length, he would dispute
    Confute, change hands, and still confute

  37. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 21:56

    Attention! Attention! We have a fake, but accurate sighting. I’m not even going there. If there was credible evidence of Bush skipping out on National Guard Service then that should have been presented instead of contrived fakery. Puhleeze…don’t make me break out my moonbat stick!

  38. el cunningham, bastardo said,

    August 1, 2006 at 22:04

    my tinfoil hat repels moonbat sticks.

    *end transmission*

  39. fiver said,

    August 1, 2006 at 22:23

    *throws up hands in defeat* Oh dear, not the moonbat stick. Someone save me! Your grasp of logic is too much for my feeble moonbat mind!

    Or you could, y’know, read the article I just linked to, where it spells out that the credible evidence presented was completely ignored because of that stupid memo. A memo that was never proven to be a forgery.

    Speaking of the Republican noise machine, do you think that story would have gotten as much coverage as it did without some support from somewhere higher up the foodchain? People make all kinds of a accusations on blogs, and normally they don’t result in big-time news anchors losing their jobs.

  40. MCH said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:00

    We have a fake, but accurate sighting

    Indeed! It’s deja vu. I recall encountering just such a sentiment back when people were crying out “Saddam Hussein in the Niger with the yellowcake.” Ah, truthiness!

    Of course, there is something of a difference between a news organization being snookered by allegedly faked evidence about an actually true event (AWOL Bush) and hordes of partisans actively promoting a) faked evidence about something that didn’t happen (yellowcake) and b) faked evidence to deliberately misrepresent another’s position (Dingell). But it would be incivil to point that out.

  41. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:15

    MCH, I’m sorry, but that post contains alien abductions, crops circles, Sasquatch, AND the face on Mars. Of course I’ve already commented about the Dingell thing, though my take on it is slightly different. I’m not gonna bother refuting the yellowcake and AWOL claims because they’ve been debunked so many times by so many people it would be a waste of time, especially considering you still believe the myths after all this time.

  42. Michael Bérubé said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:16

    Whenever I see this kind of blatent dishonesty in Right Blogistan, I always think the same thing. They get away with it. Always. No consequences. None. If we tried it, we’d be castigated unto the gates of hell. Now, why is that?

    See, this is precisely the kind of overheated partisan rhetoric that brings the left blogofascisphere into disrepute. Don’t make Lee Siegel come here and break out his moonbat stick!

  43. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:18

    Oh, and you get a whack of the moonbat stick for using truthiness.

  44. fiver said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:20

    Bill B, you get a whack of the stupid stick for not citing your sources.

  45. justme said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:21

    Your statement is rather like saying “I know you believe that Redstate called Dingell a supporter of terrorist groups, but I don’t share that view.� No. No belief involved, no view involved. It’s just a fact.

    Alas, for some, facts are only what they believe they are. Objective reality? Oh, come now. That’s a bit much to expect from somebody with a “moonbat stick”, no?

  46. Smiling Mortician said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:25

    I’ve heard your arguments before and all I can say is it’s just more Sasquatch sightings

    The totality of my argument was that there’s a distinct difference between facts and opinions. Facts can be objectively proven true or false based on observation of available evidence. Opinions cannot be proven true or false, but can be supported or refuted by using — you guessed it — facts. How that argument is the equivalent of a Sasquatch sighting is a false analogy to beat all false analogies.

    And here I was trying to have an actual argument, with logic and ethics and stuff. Silly me.

  47. Bill B said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:28

    justme, I don’t know what Redstate said and I don’t care. It’s beside the point. And fiver, if after all this time you still believe in your mythology I’m certainly not going to waste my time trying to set you straight. You’ve obviously been in an echo chamber like the one you people say rightwingers are in. I know better than to go on a wild goose chase just to have you cover your eyes and pretend you don’t see anything.

    Good day!

  48. fiver said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:36

    And fiver, if after all this time you still believe in your mythology I’m certainly not going to waste my time trying to set you straight. You’ve obviously been in an echo chamber like the one you people say rightwingers are in

    Convenient. “I have all this evidence that you’re wrong and won’t show it to you! But it’s totally there!”

    If you’re so convinced that we’re a bunch of whackos, then why are you here?

  49. Smiling Mortician said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:42

    I don’t know what Redstate said and I don’t care . . . Good day!

    And there you have it. The Bill B version of winning an argument: you can keep your stinking evidence ‘cuz I’m taking my ball and I’m going home.

  50. Dan Someone said,

    August 1, 2006 at 23:59

    Hey Bill B, tell you what. You hold your breath until Powerline issues a correction and an explanation of what Dingell really said, and I will send flowers to your memorial service. Deal?

  51. Worst. President. Ever. said,

    August 2, 2006 at 0:15

    You can’t argue with wingnuts, because they are allowed to use their own facts.

    Case in point: Flush Limbaugh:

    You know who really killed those people are the Hezbos. Hezbollah killed those people. Hezbollah put those people in that building and brought the rocket launchers in close by, knowing full well that the launcher would be targeted. That building didn’t fall for eight hours after it was hit. What do you bet that the Hezbos finished the job that the Israeli bomb did not actually complete? What do you bet they killed their own people for the PR aspect? These people cannot compete militarily with any industrialized nation, so they have to fight the PR and the spin war. And it is amazing to me to see how easily the duped US and world media is.

  52. mwg said,

    August 2, 2006 at 0:18

    Didn’t Powerline push the idea that the Martinez memo about Terry Schiavo was faked–until somebody on the Martinez staff admitted to writing it?

  53. Steve said,

    August 2, 2006 at 0:36

    Didn’t Powerline push the idea that the Martinez memo about Terry Schiavo was faked–until somebody on the Martinez staff admitted to writing it?

    Yes, but they claimed victory anyway due to some minor error in the original reporting. As usual for wingnuts when proven totally wrong, they seize on some nit and claim that was their central, limited point all along.

  54. Whammer said,

    August 2, 2006 at 0:41

    What can Bill B possibly be talking about when he alludes to the “yellowcake” mythology? Does he mean the 16 words that the White House admitted should not have been in the SOTU address?

    Does he mean the forged documents were not forged? Does he mean the “independent” report from British intelligence that depended on the forged documents?

    Oh, and again, did he forget that the White House admitted the yellowcake reference should not have been in the SOU? That nobody in the Bush administration defends that story?

    What possible universe are these wingnuts inhabiting where they think even one teeny tiny bit of the yellowcake story was true? Wait, I think I know………

    Shocking that Powerline would tell misleading stories, shocking indeed. WMDs are found in Iraq!! Chlorine Bleach and Ammonia stored under sinks and in garages and sheds, hidden among the civilian population!!!!!!! Combined, those create lethal poisonous gas, just like in WW1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    How can we fight such dangerous terrorists willing to go to such lengths to hide their treachery!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where are my dang Cheetos?????????????????

  55. dgbellak said,

    August 2, 2006 at 1:33

    Shorter Bill B.:

    Cordial greetings, stupidcrazyhypocritical moonbats. [sticks fingers in ears] Mary had a little lamb, little lamb, little lamb…

  56. Kathleen said,

    August 2, 2006 at 1:42

    Shorter Bill B.: If I have learned one thing from hanging out at Powerline, it is that an argument is won by mindless repetition of talking points and insults.

  57. Neal Peart said,

    August 2, 2006 at 2:23

    fuck powerline

  58. apocalipstick said,

    August 2, 2006 at 3:11

    Once again, Colbert has coined the perfectly descriptive term. We are living in…

    wikiality

  59. Bill B said,

    August 2, 2006 at 3:13

    http://powerlineblog.com/archives/014856.php

    There ya go. :)

    I see I’ve attracted a flock of raving moonbats! Hayulp!

  60. Plisko said,

    August 2, 2006 at 3:56

    Good lord.

    50 years of diplomacy as an “honest broker” and now suddenly its a crime.

    It’s amazing what people with no clue about history or foriegn policy come up with when they are desperate to claim a rhetorical victory.

  61. Dan Someone said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:07

    Not exactly a correction, Bill B. I don’t see anything there suggesting that the Power Rangers understand that they took part in a dishonest pile-on targeting Dingell. Instead they say: “ThinkProgress has posted a longer video clip and points out that Dingell continues his last answer[...]” followed by the more complete quote. A fair reading of that sentence is that Dingell actually said and meant what Powerline said yesterday, but that he then said more. Which Powerline, of course, takes as an opportunity to bash him further.

  62. Dan Someone said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:07

    Uh-oh… somehow my italics tag did not close. Brad/Gavin/Retardo/Travis to the rescue, please.

    Hurry!

  63. Dan Someone said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:08

    Oh, hey, I closed it myself. Keen!

  64. fiver said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:09

    Bill B: Again, if you think we’re all raving moonbats, why do you read S,N?

    From Powerline’s “correction”:
    If I have this right, Dingell’s “actual view” is that the United States should be a friend of Hezbollah, though he condemns the organization for its “violence” even if he does not quite deem it a terrorist group. In other words, according to Rep. Dingell, the United States should serve as an “honest broker” between a murderer and the murderer’s intended victim. Thanks to ThinkProgress for introducing the nuance necessary to appreciate Rep. Dingell’s true view fully.

    In other words, they were wrong, but being wrong only makes them more right! Jonah Goldberg called, he wants his argument back. There’s nothing in that correction that actually says they made a mistake posting an edited video.

  65. random_guy said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:32

    Do you think the Bush admin. has now lost every conservative capable of logic and reasoning? Or is it just that the illogical, batshit-insane wingnuts are just cawing louder now that their idol is pretty much a laughing-stock?

  66. mikey said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:45

    Well, yeah. The good guys kill Lebanese. The bad guys kill Israelis. So fifty dead Israelis is WAY MUCH AWFULLER worse than a thousand dead Lebanese civilians who are responsible for all that attacks that ever have been executed against israel. The complete destruction of the country. The displacement of a million citizens. Those fucking 8 year old terrorists piss me off.

    These criminals need to face some kind of tribunal. Gawd this is the ugliest murdering criminal act I have ever seen. And if I don’t need to remind you, I’ve seen some awful, murdering, criminal shit. And the ONLY fucking punk thug asshole that can stop it is getting off on it and won’t even ASK!! I gotta go puke…

    mikey

  67. mikey said,

    August 2, 2006 at 4:51

    And then I was just reading this thread kinda randomly and I saw something I missed. Michael Berube (sorry, don’t know how to make those accent e thingies) QUOTED me. Even if it was all snark, I can now die complete….

    mikey

  68. GoatBoy said,

    August 2, 2006 at 5:52

    BLARGH! Fatty lawyerbeast! It is CREATURE did eat the videotape!!1!!!13

  69. MarkusB said,

    August 2, 2006 at 9:35

    Yeesh.

    I hope that helps.

  70. MarkusB said,

    August 2, 2006 at 9:36

    Nope.
    Okay, one more try.

    (Never mind. It’s a markup thing.)

  71. Timmah420 said,

    August 2, 2006 at 11:09

    Bill B : So let me get this straight, you click over to a predominately liberal blog, you act condescending and superior because we still buy into some sort of undefined lie about the yellowcake memos and whatever else, and then you fail to properly cite sources for your claims.

    Colour me unimpressed.

    I’ll remember to look you up when I need half hearted trollery.

  72. Mr. Mordant said,

    August 2, 2006 at 14:47

    And fiver, if after all this time you still believe in your mythology I’m certainly not going to waste my time trying to set you straight.

    “No indeed, fiver, that I simply will not do. It would be unseemly of me to disparage such unique and interesting views. I will, however, post several times over the course of several hours repeatedly asserting that I will not waste my time trying to talk sense into you Sasquatch watching, alien abductee moonbats.

    I…said…good…DAY!”

  73. Cranky Yankee said,

    August 2, 2006 at 15:15

    “In other words, they were wrong, but being wrong only makes them more right! Jonah Goldberg called, he wants his argument back. ”

    Priceless!

    Cranky Yankee

  74. Christopher said,

    August 2, 2006 at 16:58

    The question is not “Why would a prestigious blog like Powerline do this?”, the question is, “Why would a blog so utterly lacking in substance and merit ever get any prestige?”

    Maybe at one point they were insightful, but for the last 3 years they’ve done nothing but repeat GOP talking points, usually without even the embellishment that Rush or Malkin give them.

    In fact,m I think this might be a good contest: Find a Powerline post where the boys disagre with mainstream Republican thinking.

    Incidentally, I’m completely baffled at Powerline’s retraction (But not surprised). I mean, uh, the Isrealis have killed a fuckload of Lebanese citizens. And as I argued earlier, Isrealis, by being members of a democratic country with a tac-supported military, are actually MORE likely to be providing material aid and comfort to babykillers then Lebanese citizens.

    Not that this AT ALL excuses the targeting of Isreali civillians, but I think that was the Congressman’s point; what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and rationales for Isreali targeting of civilians seem to equally excuse Hezbollah targeting of civilians.

    Incidentally, am I the only persn who doesn’t see how Representative Dingell’s views on the conflict have any bearing on the Energy Commitee?

    I mean, if anything a neutral view might be slightly helpful, since a lot of Middle Eastern oil producers would be much more sympathetic to it.

  75. b said,

    August 2, 2006 at 18:13

    Christopher,

    I think you’re forgetting that, if we take over the house, Dingell will be chair of the House Energy and Commerce committee.

    I hope that helps.

  76. Nino the Mindboggler said,

    August 2, 2006 at 21:10

    …did that fix the italics?

  77. Nino the Mindboggler said,

    August 2, 2006 at 21:10

    Nope… GAAAAHHHH!!!! I-TAG! I-TAG!

  78. Bill B said,

    August 2, 2006 at 22:17

    Timmah420, hi there! Here’s something for you to read about the yellowcake myth. http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2146475

    I know, I know. It’s not from one of your “trusted sources”. That brings me back to the echo chamber thing I was discussing yesterday. I know you people won’t accept anything that doesn’t come from somewhere (blog, etc.) in which everybody already agrees with you. Therefore you won’t ever change your mind or admit you were wrong about something. That’s why I suggested it’s a waste of time for me to try to change your mind (as I stated in a couple of posts upthread).

    I read this site mainly because I have an interest in group psychology. Moonbattery and echo-chamberitis represent one of my current fascinations. I’ll comment occasionally when there’s a thread about subject matter I won’t see elsewhere or if I happen to be here when it’s posted (in this instance the Powerline story caught my eye).

    Oh, and DanSomeone? Color me shocked that when you were proven wrong you simply decided to move the goalposts so that you could make yourself feel like you weren’t wrong afterall. See? This place is the gift that keeps on giving, especially for someone like me who has a keen interest in human behavior and group interaction.

  79. GoatBoy said,

    August 3, 2006 at 0:02

    Oh aren’t we just above it all.

    I say, old bean! the native types get up to some jolly mischief, non?

  80. kerril said,

    August 3, 2006 at 1:18

    Oh Jesus Goatboy, glad I wasn’t drinking anything carbonated just then.

  81. random_guy said,

    August 3, 2006 at 4:24

    Are you seriously posting Christopher fucking Hitchens as a supposedly impartial source? You’re attempting to chastise us about exhibiting group-think, and you read Chris Hitchens and Powerline regularly? What a joke.

  82. Timmah420 said,

    August 3, 2006 at 11:54

    Bill B, still not impressed. That link is basically an opinion piece.

    But I’m sure it’s just more persecution of conservatives by that damn liberal media right?

    Hurr

  83. fiver said,

    August 3, 2006 at 20:45

    Thanks for the link, Bill B. I’m not much of a Hitchens fan, but I *will* look into the issue. That’s what we moonbats love to do, research things.

  84. wait a minute said,

    August 3, 2006 at 21:35

    You guys are missing the point. Dingell was asked whether he condemns Hezbollah, a terrorist organization. He said “no…” That’s not “yes,” it’s “no.”

    He then went on to say that the U.S. should be an “honest broker” in the middle east. That is a euphemism for “have more sympathy for terrorists.”

    No wonder most Americans don’t vote Democrat.

  85. OneTopJob6 said,

    August 4, 2006 at 6:58

    Wait a SECOND… By saying “no, I am AGAINST VIOLENCE”, in effect Dingell condemns Hezbollah but also Israel. But that won’t with the political orthodoxy, can it? Also, to be an honest broker is step in and actually DO SOMETHING instead of letting the slaughter continue. Clinton did it, Reagan did it, both to varying successes and failures.
    No wonder Americans are going to overwhelmingly throw out the rethugs in November… we aren’t swallowing your bullshit anymore.

  86. wait a minute said,

    August 4, 2006 at 22:09

    You may get a few seats, but nothing overwhelming. Certainly no majority in Congress.

    The reason is, you’ve got absolutely nothing positive to contribute to America, or even the world, for that matter.

    Moral equivalency – that’s your problem. If you condemn violence, then you cannot condemn the justifiable response to that violence. You cannot condemn both Hezbollah AND Israel. If I punch you, and you then punch me back, I should be condemned for violence, not you.

    If the Democratic leadership can’t understand that difference, you’ll never get any votes, and you don’t deserve to.

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()