QUESTION: WHY DO REPUBLICANS HAVE TO GET THE FACTS BLATANTLY WRONG TO SUPPORT THEIR ARGUMENTS?
Ken Mehlman, citing facts that are simply not true, in order to support his point. This pattern is repeated over and over and over and over.
The question that democrats, and in fact all Americans, have to ask, over and over and over, is why?
On a related note, The White House is trying to use the foiled London bombing plot to suggest that democrats are weak on national security, because, as President Bush put in in a public statement earlier today: "This shows that the United States is very much at risk."
As the above link also illustrates, WH Press Secretary Tony Snow, who interestingly used his spokesperson platform to play openly partisan politics, and grotesquely mischaracterize the Connecticut Senate race and democratic party as well (a more balanced view here), stated that the democrats "wanted to raise a White Flag on the war on terror." It is interesting how war on terror apparently means war in Iraq, which was unconnected to 9/11 and no more connected to al-Qaeda than dozens and dozens of other countries (including the United States, by the logic used of those who claim Iraq was "connected.")
Question for All Americans, including republicans. Similar to Mehlman's tactic above, why do right wing republicans grotesquely mischaracterize their opponent's positions in order to support their own points?
Another question the foiled London airplane plot raises, is, why wasn't the plot on September 11, 2001 similarly foiled? While at that time the general populace may not have been as aware of the risk, experts certainly and unambiguously were.
The question that democrats, and in fact all Americans, have to ask, over and over and over, is why?
On a related note, The White House is trying to use the foiled London bombing plot to suggest that democrats are weak on national security, because, as President Bush put in in a public statement earlier today: "This shows that the United States is very much at risk."
As the above link also illustrates, WH Press Secretary Tony Snow, who interestingly used his spokesperson platform to play openly partisan politics, and grotesquely mischaracterize the Connecticut Senate race and democratic party as well (a more balanced view here), stated that the democrats "wanted to raise a White Flag on the war on terror." It is interesting how war on terror apparently means war in Iraq, which was unconnected to 9/11 and no more connected to al-Qaeda than dozens and dozens of other countries (including the United States, by the logic used of those who claim Iraq was "connected.")
Question for All Americans, including republicans. Similar to Mehlman's tactic above, why do right wing republicans grotesquely mischaracterize their opponent's positions in order to support their own points?
Another question the foiled London airplane plot raises, is, why wasn't the plot on September 11, 2001 similarly foiled? While at that time the general populace may not have been as aware of the risk, experts certainly and unambiguously were.
2 Comments:
good question
I think it is also something that democrats need to start pointing out,and asking. it seems they often also take for granted that pointing it out once allows people to become sufficiently familiar with this pattern by the far right.
Post a Comment
<< Home