Wednesday, September 27, 2006

When You Hear This Story Will It Mention This Part of It?

Hours before the terrorism report was made public, Democrats seized on the political ammunition. Sens.
Hillary Clinton of New York and Carl Levin of Michigan both said release of the key findings alone wouldn't give Americans enough information, and they accused the administration of selective declassification.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., sought a rare secret session of the House to discuss the report's classified findings. Her request was rejected — 217-171 — on a nearly straight party-line vote. In an interview, she said the intelligence estimate "is not a corroboration of what the president is saying. It is a contradiction of what the president is saying."

If the cabloids mention any of this more than once I'll eat my right sock. The Buzzflash link says: How Long Can the Republican Party Prop Up This Dangerous, Idiotic Man?

I'll ask, how long is our allegedly free press going to prop him up. When they lie to cover up for corrupt Republicans they are putting all of our lives at risk. Do we need a press like the one we've got?

My question is: why do Republicans who claim they wouldn't mind a Democrat like Truman find Pelosi to be too "flame-thowing partisan"? Even people who know enough to understand where exactly Truman was on the political spectrum (and ought to realize how "partisan" he was, but "partisan" was not such a bad word back then, so they might not realize that's what Truman was ...), don't get it.

How did Pelosi get a reputation as such a bomb thrower when all she does is do pretty much what ought to be expected of someone in her position?
Actually NPR is kinda spinning it as:

if the President could release the whole thing, it would show he's right, but he cannot without endangering national security, so these leaks and selective releases make it seem like the report's siding with the Dems. when it isn't.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?