Beating Media Nutters Like A Bongo Drum
(ADDED AT 10:10 P.M. AZ TIME:Generalissimo Duane finally has the transcript up. Trust me folks, read it. And you'll see what I heard when I posted this at 5:03 p.m. this evening. Larry's nuts, and has zero clue what he's talking about.)
I'll be handling the posts tonight while Marcie finishes her studying, and starts her packing; vacation starts in less than 24 hours. Don't worry, we'll still be here even on vacation. Unlike other bloggers, we have a responsibility to our site and our readers.
Hugh Hewitt finally got a couple of takers on his challenge to talk with MSM people today. First up to bat was Lawrence O'Donnell. Hugh wanted to speak with him about his tasteless post accusing the vice president of being drunk when his hunting accident occurred.
According to Mr. O'Donnell, Cheney exhibited all the signs of a man with something to hide rather than a man who was more concerned about the friend he had just shot accidently. And, Mr. O'Donnell announced that he had spoken with lawyers who backed up his assertion. With no evidence in hand, he put up the post, setting off a firestorm among the moonbat crowd.
Now, I could lie and say Mr. O'Donnell was cordial, but I'm not going to. He was combative, evasive, and anything but forthcoming. He went so far as to compare the hunting accident to Sen. Kennedy's ill-fated accident at Chappaquidick, and proclaimed that Cheney acted exactly like Kennedy. This is patently absurd, and his refusal to give the names of the lawyers he spoke with speaks volumes about his credibility; credibility, I might add, that is shared by a majority of the MSM who do "hit-and-run" pieces. Those would be pieces where they level allegations--unfounded allegations--and assertions in an attempt to smear their subject, and then when the truth comes out, they refuse to asccept their responsibility in making those accusations.
It's disgusting to see the level that the MSM has sunk to. Did Cheney drink that day? Yes, he admitted it in his interview with Brit Hume that he had a beer at lunch time. Five hours later the accident occurred. One beer hardly makes a person drunk, especially one who doesn't normally, daily imbibe alcohol. Lawrence O'Donnell is way out of line for even making the assertion. Witnesses at the scene corroborated Cheney's story, and he and the ranch owner agreed that she would contact the sheriff's department while Cheney went to the hospital with his friend to make sure he was all right.
And to Lawrence O'Donnell, what exactly are you hiding? So evasive and seething were you in your interview that it just screamed that you were lying. You attempted at every turn to slander the vice president, obviously showing your true colors and bias, but when you refuse to divulge someone integral to your story, it speaks volumes about your honesty. A name would have saved you the beating you took from Hugh, and the beatings you're going to take in the blogosphere. But, because you weren't forthcoming, and therefore we can assume you were dishonest during the interview, you deserve every blow you take.
Enjoy it, Lawrence. You earned every lump.
Publius II
ADDENDUM:
Hugh replayed the interview. I'll admit to being busy when I heard it the first time around, so I didn't catch it all. Here are a couple of things I missed in the first run. First, Larry started with 12 lawyers he spoke to, and dropped it down to five before the end of the interview. A made-up number is usually forgotten in the heat of the moment; an almost assured sign of a lie. Second, Hugh pointed to criticism that arose from Howard Kurtz about his post on the Huffington Post, and Larry claimed there was no criticism. In a gatcha moment, Hugh brought up Kurtz's piece, and read the following:
Lawrence O'Donnell gets a little tipsy in writing:
"How do we know there was no alcohol? Cheney refused to talk to local authorities until the next day. No point in giving him a breathalyzer then. Every lawyer I've talked to assumes Cheney was too drunk to talk to the cops after the shooting."
Assumes ? Is that the new standard?
This would be considered criticism, but Larry can't seem to accept this as criticism. Like so many things, Larry can't accept a lot of things that make sense. The Left never gets it, but they're guaranteed to keep up the same antics. Larry had nothing but spin and antics during this whole interview. And his missteps were far more telling than not.
Publius II (6:39 p.m. AZ Time)
(ADDED AT 10:10 P.M. AZ TIME:Generalissimo Duane finally has the transcript up. Trust me folks, read it. And you'll see what I heard when I posted this at 5:03 p.m. this evening. Larry's nuts, and has zero clue what he's talking about.)
I'll be handling the posts tonight while Marcie finishes her studying, and starts her packing; vacation starts in less than 24 hours. Don't worry, we'll still be here even on vacation. Unlike other bloggers, we have a responsibility to our site and our readers.
Hugh Hewitt finally got a couple of takers on his challenge to talk with MSM people today. First up to bat was Lawrence O'Donnell. Hugh wanted to speak with him about his tasteless post accusing the vice president of being drunk when his hunting accident occurred.
According to Mr. O'Donnell, Cheney exhibited all the signs of a man with something to hide rather than a man who was more concerned about the friend he had just shot accidently. And, Mr. O'Donnell announced that he had spoken with lawyers who backed up his assertion. With no evidence in hand, he put up the post, setting off a firestorm among the moonbat crowd.
Now, I could lie and say Mr. O'Donnell was cordial, but I'm not going to. He was combative, evasive, and anything but forthcoming. He went so far as to compare the hunting accident to Sen. Kennedy's ill-fated accident at Chappaquidick, and proclaimed that Cheney acted exactly like Kennedy. This is patently absurd, and his refusal to give the names of the lawyers he spoke with speaks volumes about his credibility; credibility, I might add, that is shared by a majority of the MSM who do "hit-and-run" pieces. Those would be pieces where they level allegations--unfounded allegations--and assertions in an attempt to smear their subject, and then when the truth comes out, they refuse to asccept their responsibility in making those accusations.
It's disgusting to see the level that the MSM has sunk to. Did Cheney drink that day? Yes, he admitted it in his interview with Brit Hume that he had a beer at lunch time. Five hours later the accident occurred. One beer hardly makes a person drunk, especially one who doesn't normally, daily imbibe alcohol. Lawrence O'Donnell is way out of line for even making the assertion. Witnesses at the scene corroborated Cheney's story, and he and the ranch owner agreed that she would contact the sheriff's department while Cheney went to the hospital with his friend to make sure he was all right.
And to Lawrence O'Donnell, what exactly are you hiding? So evasive and seething were you in your interview that it just screamed that you were lying. You attempted at every turn to slander the vice president, obviously showing your true colors and bias, but when you refuse to divulge someone integral to your story, it speaks volumes about your honesty. A name would have saved you the beating you took from Hugh, and the beatings you're going to take in the blogosphere. But, because you weren't forthcoming, and therefore we can assume you were dishonest during the interview, you deserve every blow you take.
Enjoy it, Lawrence. You earned every lump.
Publius II
ADDENDUM:
Hugh replayed the interview. I'll admit to being busy when I heard it the first time around, so I didn't catch it all. Here are a couple of things I missed in the first run. First, Larry started with 12 lawyers he spoke to, and dropped it down to five before the end of the interview. A made-up number is usually forgotten in the heat of the moment; an almost assured sign of a lie. Second, Hugh pointed to criticism that arose from Howard Kurtz about his post on the Huffington Post, and Larry claimed there was no criticism. In a gatcha moment, Hugh brought up Kurtz's piece, and read the following:
Lawrence O'Donnell gets a little tipsy in writing:
"How do we know there was no alcohol? Cheney refused to talk to local authorities until the next day. No point in giving him a breathalyzer then. Every lawyer I've talked to assumes Cheney was too drunk to talk to the cops after the shooting."
Assumes ? Is that the new standard?
This would be considered criticism, but Larry can't seem to accept this as criticism. Like so many things, Larry can't accept a lot of things that make sense. The Left never gets it, but they're guaranteed to keep up the same antics. Larry had nothing but spin and antics during this whole interview. And his missteps were far more telling than not.
Publius II (6:39 p.m. AZ Time)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 6:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home