« DON'T FUCK WITH THE U.S. | Main | Great Things Come in Tiny Packages »

July 19, 2005

Does Paul Begala Think I Want to Kill Him?

According to CNSNews he does:
Young liberals this week flocked to the nation's capital to hear, among other things, liberal television pundit and Democrat political strategist Paul Begala accuse Republicans of wanting to kill him and his children to preserve tax cuts for the rich.
Wow, that's quite a thing to say. That is, if that's what he really said. Let's take a listen...

Actually hearing what he said, I clearly know that he means the terrorists want to kill him and his family and not the Republicans. There is zero mental gymnastics required to arrive at the correct interpretation. At worst, you could accuse him of babbling (something I've always suspected to be genetic on his mother's side) and not properly referring to who wants to cut taxes and who wants to murder. Maybe Bin Laden really does get fired up about cutting taxes. But since his last tape was essentially an endorsement of John Kerry's candidacy, there isn't much credence to that theory.

CNSNews, if you're looking for outrageous statements from a Democrat, just hang around Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi's office. Eventually, I'm sure one of them will oblige. But in the future, make sure the person actually makes the charge you "report" them to. After all, why would a person who thinks Republicans want to kill him send Christmas cards to them?

And while we're on the subject of poor listening or reading skills, today's AP report featured on the front page on most papers nationwide states the Bush has changed his stance on the firing of the Plame leaker(s) to only if a crime has been committed.

But what was it changed from?

September 2003
Bush: If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of. . . . If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action.

Not seeing a change in position there. A better argument all along would have been that the President should release the leaker(s) regardless of whether the letter of the law was violated. That would avoid all the legalese that aggravated many people with Clinton and might even raise Bush in the eyes of some of his detractors. Okay, that last part is wishful thinking but you never can tell.

Posted by Skayhan at July 19, 2005 05:57 PM

Comments

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?