Joe Klein Is Never Wrong. ‘Obviously.’
This morning, Time columnist Joe Klein was interviewed on MSNBC and heaped praise on President Bush’s response to the Iran NIE. Klein told Joe Scarborough:
The Bush reaction to [the NIE] — he didn’t try to block it. He didn’t try to postpone it. He didn’t spend weeks, he didn’t ask the intelligence community ‘give me a couple of weeks, let’s see if we can figure out some kind of negotiating initiative or some way to respond to this.’ He didn’t try to spin it to our advantage. This is an amazing moment of candor by the United States.
ThinkProgress criticized Klein for his comment that Bush’s reaction to the NIE was “an amazing moment of candor by the United States.” In a post titled “Misinterpreted,” Klein responds to our criticism:
This is wrong. OBviously, I was referring to the NIE itself as a remarkable moment of candor for the United States. I thought that Bush’s reaction to it was, literally, incredible. As in, not to be believed–which was made completely clear in my cover story.
In just a few short hours, Klein has gone from saying Bush engaged in an “amazing moment of candor,” to saying Bush is “not to be believed.” We appreciate the conversion, but we don’t appreciate the disingenuousness of it.
We weren’t “wrong” or “misinterpreted.” TV pundit Joe Klein explicitly said that an “amazing moment of candor” occurred in the context of “the Bush reaction” to the NIE; he marveled that Bush “didn’t try to block it” and “didn’t try to spin it.” But Time magazine blogger Joe Klein says, “I thought that Bush’s reaction to it was, literally, incredible. As in, not to be believed.”
So what was it? Was Bush’s reaction part of America’s “moment of candor,” or was it “not to be believed”? The two Joe Kleins should interpret one another, sort it out, and get on the same page. And maybe one of the Joe Kleins should apologize to the other.
As Atrios stated, “Is it possible for Joe Klein to admit error at all? He could just say: I misspoke, which is easy to do on live radio or television.”
UPDATE: BarbinMD recalls Joe Klein’s classic response to his FISA distortions: “I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who’s right.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Everyone wants in on the “misinterpreted” stuff now a days.
Buck Fush
December 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pmI’ll give him this one.
Even though he spent most of the paragraph in question kissing his way so far around Bush’s posterior he probably could have filed for squatter’s rights (no pun intended), he did finish the paragraph by saying it was a moment of candor for America .
December 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pmOh look– General Zod has escaped from the Phantom Zone again and is once more threatening the bottled city of CANDOR. Where’s Supeman when you need him?
December 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pmOh, sure, Joe. And the thumb hurts the hammer. Happens all the time. If it is any consolation to the thumb, the hammer did have a split lip
December 6th, 2007 at 5:13 pm“You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.â€
- CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ RANCHO/ POLITICS/ MOCK/ mockingbird.html
December 6th, 2007 at 5:17 pmI’m right there with everyone in my opinion of Joe Klein and his mishaps… but I can easily accept his contention here, that he was referring to the NIE itself as an “amazing moment of candor”.
There’s plenty to criticize in what he said without overreaching on this particular point. It can be interpreted either way, but if JK says that’s what he meant, I can read it that way.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:21 pmLike Jon Stewart said I think after Cheney shooting the guy in the face, don’t they know we’re taping all this stuff? Geez…endlessly defensive.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:22 pmTraitorous. Scumbag.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:22 pmJoke Line, media potentate has a tinsy winsy problem with communication to go along with complete lack of aquaintenace with the truth.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:24 pm.
email time and let them know that they are 100% junk for paying this political hack a single cent for his lies…
letters@time.com
December 6th, 2007 at 5:27 pmJoe Klein has a lot more to answer for than just this, and so does Time magazine.
I cut him no slack at all. He’s a mendacious fraud.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:28 pmJoe, get help.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:34 pmI think joe thinks ‘candor’ is a word for ‘fooling the public’.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:35 pmSo now he can say he was right… either way.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:37 pmYou MUST read this Glenn Greenwald blog entry to see how utterly corrupt Joe Klein, Time Magazine and Howie Kurtz are. You’ll have steam coming out of your ears.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/index.html
Its the Dec. 4th entry titled Time Magazine refused to publish responses to Klein’s false smears.
Glenn Greenwald deserves an award for the work he’s done on this story.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:42 pmI just read the entire Time piece and TP is up shat creek on this one.
Here’s the ‘candor’ excerpt
But it seems apparent the President made little effort to figure out how his Administration could leverage the shocking candor of the intelligence report to his advantage in dealing with Iran.
It seems to me that Klein doesn’t pull any punches about how the president screwed this up. Just my 2.5 cents worth.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:44 pmPS. He doesn’t go into the lying or other peripheral topics, just the president’s presentation…
Even though he spent most of the paragraph in question kissing his way so far around Bush’s posterior he probably could have filed for squatter’s rights (no pun intended), he did finish the paragraph by saying it was a moment of candor for America .
Comment by raynman
Sorry rayman, he said nothing about “America”. Here’s the paragraph, let’s dissect it:
The Bush reaction to [the NIE] — he didn’t try to block it. He didn’t try to postpone it. He didn’t spend weeks, he didn’t ask the intelligence community ‘give me a couple of weeks, let’s see if we can figure out some kind of negotiating initiative or some way to respond to this.’ He didn’t try to spin it to our advantage. This is an amazing moment of candor by the United States.
He was clearly talking about Bush’s reaction to the NIE not the NIE itself. Then he ends the statement with “This is an amazing moment of candor by the United States.”
It is very clear that he was talking about Bush’s reaction to the NIE (as explained further by Klein in the following sentences) was what was an “amazing moment of candor by the United States”.
The thing I find most scary about Klein’s comment is that he equates Bush with “The United States”, kind of when Bush calls it his government.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:46 pmbilbo, are we reading the same article?
I read ’shocking candor of the intelligence report’>??
December 6th, 2007 at 5:48 pmUPDATE: BarbinMD recalls Joe Klein’s classic response to his FISA distortions: “I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who’s right.â€
Translated from KleinSpeak into English, “I wouldn’t know how to empty piss out of my boot if the instructions were printed on the sole.”
Cheers,
December 6th, 2007 at 5:50 pmJoe Klein is another Washington insider ingratiating himself with the White House in order to get access and appear “reasonable” and “not like those protesters in the street.” You’re such a “mature centrist,” Joe! LMAO!
December 6th, 2007 at 5:51 pmHere’s the link I’m reading.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:51 pmhttp://www.time.com/ time/ printout/ 0,8816,1691625,00.html
bilbo, are we reading the same article?
I read ’shocking candor of the intelligence report’>??
Comment by RUCerious — December 6, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
i don’t think you are. I think one of you is referring to the transcript from the MSNBC interview and the other is referring to the Time article of Klein’s. I think RUCerious is correct; Klein pulls no punches in the Time piece, but . . . in the interview he comes off completely differently and does sound like he’s kissing the presidential butt.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:52 pmThe quote from the article is
Oddly, Bush didn’t seem to ask for a delay in the release of the report. He could easily have requested a few weeks for his Administration to chew over the import of the NIE, discuss it with our allies, organize a new diplomatic initiative to negotiate with the Iranians.
As it was, Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns briefed the U.N. Security Council members who had been considering a new round of sanctions against Iran about the same time that word of the NIE broke in the press. When it did, the Chinese, who had seemed surprisingly ready to approve the sanctions, started backing away from that position.
WTF? Are we on different pages?
December 6th, 2007 at 5:54 pmThanks for the adjudication, gummitch.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:55 pmI knew I was whiffing on something!
I’d like to examine and dissect this statement by Bush…
The President looked awful. He stood puffy-eyed, stoop-shouldered, in front of the press corps discussing the stunning new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iran halted its nuclear-weapons program in 2003.
He looked as if he’d spent the night throwing chairs around the Situation Room. A reporter noted that he seemed dispirited, and the President joked,
“This is like — all of a sudden, it’s like Psychology 101, you know?” He added, “No, I’m feeling pretty spirited, pretty good about life, and I made the decision to come before you so I can explain the NIE.” And then, defiantly, “And so, kind of Psychology 101 ain’t working. It’s just not working. I understand the issues, I clearly see the problems, and I’m going to use the NIE to continue to rally the international community for the sake of peace.” And then he walked out.
Can anyone shed any light on WTF he’s trying to convey with the Psych 101 babble??
December 6th, 2007 at 5:56 pm“The problem is Iran, and Iran has not stepped back from trying to pursue a nuclear weapon, and — or reprocessing and enriching uranium, which would lead to a nuclear weapon.†[White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, 10/26/07]
“We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, for the sake of peace.†[Bush, 11/7/07]
“We’re in a position now, clearly, especially when we look at Iran, where it’s very, very important we succeed in our efforts, our national security efforts, to discourage the Iranians from enriching uranium and producing nuclear weapons.†[Cheney, 11/9/07]
“We are convinced that they are developing nuclear weapons.†[Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, 11/13/07]
December 6th, 2007 at 6:03 pmMeanwhile, I’m still waiting for “conservatives” to explain why Republicans should be trusted to fix this whole Republican mess.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:05 pmWell, obviously, Joe Klein is never wrong. Saddam Hussein moved all the WMD to Syria. George W. Bush is the greatest president ever.
Pigs fly and I’m the Pope.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:08 pmMemo to Joe: Stop the madness!!!
December 6th, 2007 at 6:11 pmBush knew about the NIE report before,
December 6th, 2007 at 6:13 pmBush didn’t know about the NIE report then,
Bush got the NIE report after,
Bush attacked the credibility of the NIE report.
Meanwhile, I’m still waiting for Think Progress to source their claim that George Bush said that Iran was “quickly developing†a nuclear weapon.
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 6:14 pm
You’ve been off-planet the last year or so? Or maybe they don’t allow newspapers and television where you’ve been.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:16 pmJoe looks like he should just go home and sleep it off.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:17 pmDC - that’s too many syllables for our National Embarrassment to handle in one sentence.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:20 pmBut it’s real nice that he has you to stick up for him.
You have a big heart, Dreamy.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:21 pm#30 Comment by Leftside Annie — December 6, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
Pigs fly and I’m the Pope.
Hmmm… Are you sure you really want to be the Pope?
December 6th, 2007 at 6:21 pm38 - think progress is far from needing it’s “day” “saved”
it’s your criminal cheerleader hero that needs saving
December 6th, 2007 at 6:22 pmAs much as Joe was wrong here, is this seriously something Think progress should be spending its time and resources on? Giving press to people like this just makes themselves feel even more important. I’ve read much more impressive and more important NEWS on think progress. This is a low.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:24 pmOr maybe they don’t allow newspapers and television where you’ve been.
Comment by gummitch — December 6, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
Cream Cruiser prolly doesn’t have room for a TV up his butt, ya know, w/ that fat head lodged up there already.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:25 pmAs usual, JK is missing the bigger point: This NIE report has clearly been postponed for many, many months. If Seymore Hersh knew about it back in April, are you trying to tell me Bush (or Cheney) did not? Bush has been forced to lie in public about this because the report finally spilled out into public view. Lots of reports have been produced with lots of candor. Bush and Company have successfully buried most of them. Joe Klein knows this.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:26 pm40 - Nah, the clothes suck.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:26 pmlet’s face it, it’s Joe Klein’s JOB to praise Bush. I have trouble remembering a time when it wasn’t.
the last thing in the world that will make Joe Klein feel important is to be discussed in a forum like this. he thinks we are pond scum. no, we are the scum UNDER the pond scum. He is presented, in mainstream media as a LIBERAL. get it? “even the LIBERAL thinks the mean lefty blogs pick on OUR GREAT LEADER” if mean lefty blogs didn’t point out that our great leader ain’t so great, you think Joe and his LIBERAL pals would mention it much? at all? once or twice a year?
Joe is a gumball machine. He hates us because we say so.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:32 pmklein is irrelevant now……
December 6th, 2007 at 6:37 pmSo, when you cowards get around to backing up Think Progress’ (false) claims instead of incessantly attacking me for pointing it out, get back to me, alright? I thought stone-walling was something only Republicans did? Guess not!
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
It’s much more fun to watch you pee yourself.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:38 pmDreamy, give it up, honey. We’ve already done so time after time. You just refuse to accept that there might be a few different words involved but that the meaning was the same.
It’s just ridiculous hair-splitting, which is another thing that you’re very good at.
Why don’t you run along and haunt someone else…?
December 6th, 2007 at 6:39 pmDubya:
“The need for missile defense in Europe is real and I believe it’s urgent. Iran is pursuing the technology that could be used to produce nuclear weapons, and ballistic missiles of increasing range that could deliver them. Last November, Iran conducted military exercises in which it launched ballistic missiles capable of striking Israel and Turkey, as well as American troops based in the Persian Gulf. Iranian officials have declared that they are developing missiles with a range of 1,200 miles, which would give them the capability to strike many of our NATO allies, including Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, and possibly Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia. Our intelligence community assesses that, with continued foreign assistance, Iran could develop an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States and all of Europe before 2015. If it chooses to do so, and the international community does not take steps to prevent it, it is possible Iran could have this capability. And we need to take it seriously — now.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2007/ 10/ 20071023-3.html
December 6th, 2007 at 6:40 pm#26 Comment by RUCerious — December 6, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
Can anyone shed any light on WTF he’s trying to convey with the Psych 101 babble??
Here is a shot in the dark at an answer. Often in psychotherapy if a person is in denial he is faced with his contradictions, avoidance, evasions, or lies. It can be a very difficult position to be in as there is no real escape from the unpleasant truth he does not want to admit to.
Bush is in that position here and (I suspect) having been in some form of therapy (his alcohol abuse) he is probably familiar with that feeling. It has always been obvious (to me anyway) that Bush has no use for psychology. Especially since there was a book written called “Bush on the Couch” by a psychiatrist, Justin Frank. Written in 2004 I think. It was a devastating condemnation of Bush.
So, here he is trying to smash psychology and his “interrogators”… er questioners who are trying to use psychology 101 (101 being the most basic college course.) And he throws that 101 bit into their faces and quickly leaves.
Sad thing for Bush is that he knows they are right and have him by the short hairs. And this is the best he can do to cover his naked ass.
Anyone else have another take on this?
December 6th, 2007 at 6:41 pmThanks Merlin, much appreciated!
December 6th, 2007 at 6:44 pmHere’s a Righty answer for ya, DC:
As soon as your “challenge” puts money in my pocket, I’ll respond to it.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:45 pm55 - Dubbie’s just trying to tie in with the “psychobabble” meme that’s a faithful old saw Righty uses when cornered. One of Rush’s old standbys.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:46 pmMore Dubya:
“And Iran’s active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust.
Iran’s actions threaten the security of nations everywhere. And that is why the United States is rallying friends and allies around the world to isolate the regime, to impose economic sanctions. We will confront this danger before it is too late.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2007/ 08/ 20070828-2.html
December 6th, 2007 at 6:50 pmDC - please hold your breath while you wait.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:57 pmDreamy - I read a long list of quotes that bear out the fact that The Hood Ornament has mendaciously stated over and over and over again that Iran is indeed developing nuclear weapons and must be stopped — a list which you very conveniently ignored.
Trying to discuss anything with someone as delusional as you are is a complete waste of time. It’s not my job to do your research OR prove my opinions - which is what you’re demanding.
And, in that spirit, dear, bite me.
Now run along. You’ve been dismissed.
December 6th, 2007 at 6:59 pmDC
December 6th, 2007 at 7:01 pmYour pursuit of exacting semantics in order to play “gotcha” is really getting old. Give it a rest. It is an old meme that is used to distract the listener from the reality of what is going on. Magicians do this all the time. What you are trying to distract us from is what BushCo is really up to in the ME. Sorry to inform you that we here will not bite into your rotten apple.
Dubya again:
“Our position is that we would hope that nations would be very careful in dealing with Iran, particularly since Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon, and a major threat to world peace is if the Iranians had a nuclear weapon.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2007/ 03/ 20070331-3.html
December 6th, 2007 at 7:03 pm#64 Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Ah, yes, I’m the one trying to play gotcha. Delusional much?
Well, I’m certainly glad you are willing to admit it! As to your question about your being delusional… well I er…um I guess it must be true if you aren’t sure.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:11 pm#66 Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
Hank,
Apparently you’re having a difficulty with this “quickly†concept.
Hey Hank! I guess he “gotcha”, didn’t he. Boy are you a fool, huh. And pretty stupid to boot, right. Well, take heart, you are in good company along with Leftside Annie, gummich etc. We are all just too stooopid to know that TP is “not being troothful.”
December 6th, 2007 at 7:16 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 7:12 pm
OK, I’ll play along… I know you are, but what am I?
Something like that? Later kids.
ooooh, good comeback DC. Don’t run away just cause you are losing! Stick around. I’m just beginning to enjoy you!
December 6th, 2007 at 7:19 pm#71Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
Instead of attacking the messenger, why not just take on the challenge and prove Think Progress’ innocence?
First, why don’t you talk to TP about this, instead of me?
Second, Why is it my job to defend what anyone else says? I will only defend what I say, others can speak for themselves.
Third, Your “challenge” is a tired meme, not a challenge at all, as I stated before. It is an invitation to play “gotcha” with you. Either I win (gotcha”) if I can, or you win (gotcha) if I can’t. That is a stupid game, either way it works out.
Fourth, I’m not attacking “the messenger” as you put it. I’m directly attacking you for playing “gotcha” which has nothing to do with TP, their innocence or guilt.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:34 pmYeah, Pres Bush never uttered the word “quickly” in regards to Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon, in the same way he never qualified Iraq as an “imminent” threat to its neighbors.
In both cases, however, the sense of urgency in the timing was very clear. Pres Bush might not have used that very word, but neither did ThinkProgress claim he did.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:40 pm“agree with my spin or else. agree with my spin or it means you can’t think for yourself. agree with my spin or i’m going to pollute every thread at your site with Righty jibber-jabber all day long”
talk about tedious
sweet jesus!!
December 6th, 2007 at 7:46 pm#73 Comment by Gregor Samsa — December 6, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
Yeah, Pres Bush never uttered the word “quickly†in regards to Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon, in the same way he never qualified Iraq as an “imminent†threat to its neighbors.
In both cases, however, the sense of urgency in the timing was very clear.
Hey DC,
December 6th, 2007 at 7:51 pmYou still around? This is the essense that all you wingers don’t want to admit to. Gregor nails it perfectly, and why I mentioned your “pursuit of exacting semantics”. Your attempt at “distraction” fools no one around here.
One has to ask, if Iraq was no “imminent” threat to its neighbors, then why mention them in connection with WMD, terrorism, call Hussein a “gathering threat”, and make lengthy, frequent speeches on the need for action against Iraq.
The same logic applies to Bush and his speeches on Iran. If Iran wasn’t “quickly” developing a nuclear weapon, why the urgency of doing something to stop them? If a nuclear weapons wasn’t within Iran’s reach in the immediate future, why the heated rhetoric against Iran?
Trolls love to play semantics because it’s the only way for them to feel smart, even if they look utterly foolish to the rest of us.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pmAs for Klein the buffoon, he was for calling Bush’s latest lie an “amazing moment of candor”, before he was against it.
Flip flop!
December 6th, 2007 at 8:03 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
Do you know the difference between a direct, literal quote and a paraphrase, a rephrase, a translation, a rendering?
Actually, do you know what “paraphrase” means”?
Because that’s what ThinkProgress did.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:05 pmI thought this was a “Joe Klein is an a-hole” thread.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:10 pmOh, and btw, everyone has noticed that the NIE directly contradicts the Bush administration’s hyperventilation over Iran’s supposed quest for a nuclear weapon (yes, I know, Bush never said “quest”. I did. It’s also a paraphrase.)
Another aspect everyone else has noticed is that this puts a big dent in the sense of urgency that the White House wanted to convey regarding possible military action against Iran (yes, I know. Bush never said “convey” or “military action”. I did. He said “all options are on the table”).
Everyone, that is, but you. You are too smart for that.
/sarcasm off
December 6th, 2007 at 8:19 pm“agree with my spin or else. agree with my spin or it means you can’t think for yourself. agree with my spin or i’m going to pollute every thread at your site with Righty jibber-jabber all day longâ€
December 6th, 2007 at 8:21 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
1. How do you supposed I talk to TP about this? Do you think they care?
2. As a member of this community, I thought you might be interested in defending it.
3. Or you can just admit that, yes, TP lied.
4. I’m not playing gotcha, I’m establishing that TP lied.
Answers:
1. You figure it out.
2. Think what ever you like. However, you are ignoring my earlier post on this point. To say this now as you just have is an insult. Typical of wingers.
3. Another insult! Go back and read my previous post.
4. Yes, you are. You are either lying or trying to distract again. I personally don’t care what you are trying to prove, because I “know” that you are going to play “gotcha” with the results. That is the real purpose behind your “challenge.”
Now be a big boy and admit what you are doing or run along and play in the sand box till mommy calls you.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:23 pmAnother thing, DC, your “region” is quite the land mass. I realise that on the little globe your high school teacher keeps on his desk, Israel looks really close to India, but fact is they are actually rather far apart.
Not that you would have any use for that knowledge.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:32 pm#80 Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Well, if you had just listened to the man, he said we needed to act before Iraq became an imminent threat - because then it would be too late.
Hey Gregor,
December 6th, 2007 at 8:33 pmHe got you too, huh? Just like Hank, right? And Leftside Annie. And gummich. Wow, ol DC is really “crushing all your dreams” you know. Man, this game of “gotcha” really is something else, huh? Isn’t he great folks! I’ll bet he even irons his skivvies and hangs them up on hangers in his closet.
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:28 pm
Intentions without capabilities amount to little. Fingar is talking about intentions, not actual nuclear capabilities.
Let me put it in terms you can understand: You may really want to go to the moon, but without a means to get there you are going nowhere near it.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:35 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:31 pm
Tsk, tsk. That was a really poor post, DC. You are really straining here. I don’t like stupid challenges, but you seem to, so why not take me up on mine here:
Now be a big boy and admit that you are playing “gotcha” as I showed you in post #89. Please read the bolded part over and over until you get it.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:39 pmSince when did Bush claimed that Iran had nuclear weapons capabilities?
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:41 pm
Wha?
You said “Iran’s supposed quest for a nuclear weapon?” and then proceeded to quote Fingar, as if Fingar’s quote validates what you were saying -when all he is doing is talking about Iran’s intentions not their actual capability to produce one.
Again, Iran might have intentions but without the means to produce one nuclear weapon, they won’t.
Is that simple enough for ya?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:45 pmYOU, dc, have no standing.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:45 pmUnderstanding, of course, a quest as an action that goes beyond the simple intention.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:46 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:41 pm
Talk about playing semantics.
Hey DC,
You just did it again! Is “gotcha” the only game that gives you an org…er thrill? Gotcha is the only thing your posts are about, while using some fact or other as a distraction from what you are doing. Which is rubbing your…er hands at some one elses “stupidity” or some such supposed fault.
Maybe you aren’t a “winger” after all! Just someone who gets his rocks off by showing how inferior other people are in your own eyes.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:51 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
Merlin,
This would all be so much easier if you just had the guts to admit that Think Progress lied. There would be no “gotcha†if you just faced the truth. I made a point, that Think Progress has no standing to be asking anyone else to apologize for mistakes when they continuously write complete BS, and I provided a recent example.
Guts???? BwaaaaHaaaaaHaaaaa
Your posts are getting funnier all the time. Keep straining while not paying any attention to what I write in my posts to you. You are the one with no guts, DC. Admit to playing “gotcha” which I have just shown you again in post #98. So far you haven’t the guts to admit to what is right in front of you.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:00 pmBut then, neither has your Emperor, the glorious GWB, so I guess you are in great company.
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
::sigh::
In case you missed it -it’s only been all over the news for the past couple of days- Pres Bush knew of the NIE back in August, but was still warning about the pending confrontation with Iran in October.
He was also fearmongering in Europe, trying to get the Czechs to buy a system to defend themselves of an attack from Iran.
That’s what’s wrong with what he said. But you don’t have to believe me, here is a link to your official source of news. Read and weep over your Dear Leader’s complete loss of credibility; assuming he had any left.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:12 pm#100 Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
Can you tell me how what Bush has been saying all along is any different than what Fingar testified, that Iran wants a nuclear weapon? That it would be quite dangerous if Iran were ever to get one?
What specifically is wrong with anything Bush has said?
You know, DC, you almost have me convinced that you are serious.
Question:
What is the difference between Fingar and Bush? Eh? Do you get it? No? OK I will tell you. Fingar can’t declare war. Bush can and already has with Iraq. Pre-emptively!
BTW, on the Cheney thread you are knocking both parties, yet here you defend Bush. Why??? Are you playing both ends against the middle?
December 6th, 2007 at 9:15 pmWhat is the difference between Fingar and Bush?
Comment by Merlin — December 6, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
Heh. That was my first thought. Clearly, it is difficult for our little friend to tell the difference between the roles of two authority figures. It’s all too blurry in his mind.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:23 pm“I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon,” Bush said.
Bush Warns of ‘World War III’ if Iran Gains Nuclear Weapons
And since Iran was on a quest for nuclear weapons….
But since only DreamCrusher can correctly interpret Pres Bush’s mind and deeds, WWIII probably means something other than war.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:29 pmContext. I know, such a tough concept since it involves comprehension skills.
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:25 pm
Says the twit who is unable and/or refuses to put Pres Bush fearmongering in proper context.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:30 pmI love the way trolls want to disect the word ‘candor’. example: ‘First lets take the letter ‘C’..what does ‘C’ really mean. I comes from the latin word…..
December 6th, 2007 at 9:35 pmOh brother!
f this site was incorrectly lambasting a Democrat, I would defend them too. But of course, this site rarely does that, so, well, you understand.
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:23 pm
Another in your endless series of lies. lies, lies, lies, followed by rightard bullshit. You’re so weak, you hate TP, yet you can’t resist coming here and making a fool of yourself. You have a problem, DC. You have no comprehension skills, you don;t do nuance, you don;t recognize the beating of the Bushco war drums because Bush has never directly been quoted as saying quickly, even though he never misses a chance to accuse iran of something they aren’t doing, and that nobody can prove that they ever did do. he pulled the same lies for Iraq, now nobody but you and the other idiots of the 20% are buying it. No WMD, no terrorists, no nothing but oil. You’re weak but slimy, creamcruiser, but you don;t fool anyone here. if you’re so very upset, take your dolls and go home. Leave the patriots here alone, go hang with your traitor buddies.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:40 pmJoe Klein is an authoritarian lapdog to the neocons. Somebody will pat him on the back, and he’ll wag his tail.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:46 pmHere, let help you up, mr. dream crusher, you just got knocked cold.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:49 pmComment by Gregor Samsa — December 6, 2007 @ 9:23 pm
Clearly, it is difficult for our little friend to tell the difference between the roles of two authority figures. It’s all too blurry in his mind.
Exactly so. “Conservatives” truly believe in a hierarchical structure for the country. They are at the top and the rest of the people are servants. So, whoever is an authority figure is OK. They are all on the same team and as long as they know their place it does not matter where on the ladder they are.
Progressives stand for equality amongst people, a democratic socxiety and all that stands for. Conservatives love and seek aristocracy, along with all that stands for. Like empire for instance.
Conservatives are not the opposite of Progressives, offering another view to be debated about. They are against a democratic society and should be seen by the people for who and what they are..
December 6th, 2007 at 9:55 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
Iran hates Israel. Iran gets nukes. Iran nukes Israel. Israel retaliates. The US gets involved. Nations take sides. WWIII. Get it?
What I get here is a bunch of hypothetical baloney to justify beating the Iran war drums. This scenario is totally out in left field. Completely backwards, I might add.
I mean, Bush is hardly the first to envision this scenario.
Lots of neocons are spewing this crap all the time. So what?
It’s a pretty logical scenario for what would happen if Iran got nuclear weapons.
It is not logical at all. It is a product of neocon think tank propaganda designed to frighten people and justify invading Iran.
Do you deny that?
I deny it totally!! And if you really believe it you must be comprehension challenged.
December 6th, 2007 at 10:05 pmComment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
And just where did I say who would pull the first punch? I said Bush was warning of the pending confrontation with Iran. One way or another, the US would be involved in a war against a nuclear country. Or at least that the doomsday scenario that Pres Bush repeated over, and over to anyone who’d listen.
He was repeating this script even after he was told about the new information regarding Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
That is the context you are trying so hard to avoid acknowledging, Mr. I-am-all-about-the-context.
December 6th, 2007 at 11:09 pmIt’s a pretty logical scenario for what would happen if Iran got nuclear weapons. Do you deny that?
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
“Logical”? That Iran gets a nuclear weapon and they immediately launch an attack against Israel?
The Mullahs are many things. Stupid and suicidal are not among them.
December 6th, 2007 at 11:12 pm#109: [World War III is] a pretty logical scenario for what would happen if Iran got nuclear weapons.
There is no evidence to support this claim. There is no evidence that Iran would launch an unprovoked nuclear attack on Israel. Your claim is conventional wisdom within neoconservative circles, but it is not a rational claim. It’s based on fear and loathing, like most Republican policies.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:47 amNot that I would want Iran to get nuclear weapons, but exactly how does Iran possessing even a few weapons somehow make our thousands impotent? Or even Israel’s nuclear stockpile?
I would think the knowledge that just half the warload of one US Ohio-class SSBN could turn their whole nation into a parking lot would deter the Iranians from committing any kind of nefarious nuclear strike.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:49 amI think that Kos post by BarbinMD is the money shot.
It’s the first half of the Klein quote from, “The Bush reaction…” to “….our advantage”, that is a little bizarre, not least because it appears to be entirely speculative commentary.
I do accept he was referring specifically to the NIE when he referred to the “amazing moment of candor”, and I think you are being as stubborn as he is if you won’t accept this. Klein’s characterization of Bush’s bobbing and weaving is where Blogger-Joe appears to disagree with Talkinghead-Joe, and perhaps most importantly, as BarbinMD points out, neither Joe appears too familiar with what Bush has actually being doing.
Klein absolutely deserved to have the sh!t thrown at him for his FISA article, I think here the case is not quite as clear… unless you are making the point that he spoke without fully engaging his brain which hardly amounts to a high crime of journalism.
Klein is as stubborn as all hell, but I’d say he’s worth hearing out here. And he isn’t smearing anybody which makes a nice change.
December 7th, 2007 at 8:00 amJoke Line reminds us all to have our foreheads waxed monthly…
December 7th, 2007 at 9:45 amWith the NIE stating plainly that Iran could have a nuclear weapon by 2015, why is Bush’s qualified statement about a possible world war any less accurate?
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 7, 2007 @ 4:13 am
Because the NIE also says that Iran halted its nuclear program in 2003, which is in direct contradiction of Pres Bush’s assertions that Iran was on a quest for nuclear weapons.
And the NIE says Iran “would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame” if they decided to do so; again, you are talking about intentions as if they were actual actions and a fact.
How a quest/action is different from an intention is something we already covered.
Bush said that if we don’t prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, we’ll could face a new world war. How does the new NIE assessment make that inaccurate at all?
Wha? I don’t know how you can extrapolate the NIE into a world war. You are making no sense.
Ah yes, because no fundamentalist Muslim would ever relish the thought of going down in flames after exterminating Jews from the face of the Earth.
What, are you a mind reader now? A fortune teller?
All the actions by the Mullahs so far have been about self-preservation, to the point of making political overtures to the US and making an offer to cooperate with the US on various topics back in 2003 -the same offer Rice later claimed she didn’t remember.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:10 pmOh please, the Iranians know that we’d never do that. We won’t even dare bomb them at all. They know perfectly well that if they nuke Israel, nobody would do it back.
Comment by DreamCrusher — December 7, 2007 @ 4:13 am
and now you’re contradicting yourself. you better get your story straight or even your best friends are going to be laughing at you behind your back.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:03 pm“Well, see, the Iranians want the Jews exterminated. ”
And this you deducted from one comment by the Iranian president, the translation of which is questionable.
And how will they go about this extermination? With the nuclear weapons they aren’t trying to build anymore?
“The Israelis have no wish to kill any Iranians, if they don’t have to. There’s a distinct difference between the attitudes of Jews towards Muslims and the opposite. One has been brainwashed for centuries to hate the other. Figure it out.”
Overgeneralize much? “Oh, them ker-razy Muslims!”
“Oh please, the Iranians know that we’d never do that. We won’t even dare bomb them at all. They know perfectly well that if they nuke Israel, nobody would do it back.”
So in other words, you feel our entire deterrence capability is useless?
What’s the point of the US having nuclear weapons, then?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:51 pm