Right-wing press smears Campus Progress Conference and Paul Begala
|
|
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
The anatomy of a right-wing smear is textbook at this point: How fortunate conservatives are to have journalists that are so talented at their craft they can listen to a statement and hear what they want to hear, even if it’s not there at all.
While Campus Progress is pleased that the right-wingers have taken an interest in our National Student Conference, we're a bit confused how they're pushing a complete lie that one of our guests, CNN pundit Paul Begala, claimed that "Republican want to kill" progressives.
These things spread faster than you can say "Durbin," but it appears the accusation first came from CNSNews.com's Jered Ede, who wrote the following:
Which would definitely be an outrageous statement, had Begala actually said that. He didn't. But that didn’t stop first the Drudge Report and then today the Washington Times from repeating this claim. Today, the capital’s own Unification rag reports flatly, "Democratic strategist Paul Begala says Republicans want to kill him and his children to preserve tax cuts for the rich.”
The video and audio of the event is up on our site in its entirety. (The segment of interest begins at about 50:40.) Or, if you'd prefer, you can listen to the audio clip in question here, which is transcribed below:
Sure, Begala could have been more precise in dealing with these pronouns. But save for referencing Bush's "friends" Begala doesn't say "Republicans," nor does he say "terrorists." We're assuming this is because most people with comprehension above a fourth-grade level would realize that Begala was referring to terrorists as the "they" who want to kill us.
So which is it: Do these right-wing journalists have the comprehension skills of elementary-schoolers, or are they lying on purpose?
While Campus Progress is pleased that the right-wingers have taken an interest in our National Student Conference, we're a bit confused how they're pushing a complete lie that one of our guests, CNN pundit Paul Begala, claimed that "Republican want to kill" progressives.
These things spread faster than you can say "Durbin," but it appears the accusation first came from CNSNews.com's Jered Ede, who wrote the following:
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.
(snip)
Begala's presence on the panel created a stir when he declared that Republicans had "done a p***-poor job of defending" the U.S.
Republicans, he said, "want to kill us."
Which would definitely be an outrageous statement, had Begala actually said that. He didn't. But that didn’t stop first the Drudge Report and then today the Washington Times from repeating this claim. Today, the capital’s own Unification rag reports flatly, "Democratic strategist Paul Begala says Republicans want to kill him and his children to preserve tax cuts for the rich.”
The video and audio of the event is up on our site in its entirety. (The segment of interest begins at about 50:40.) Or, if you'd prefer, you can listen to the audio clip in question here, which is transcribed below:
BEGALA: ...we sit back and allow George W. Bush and our Republican friends to pull out 9/11 like a cheap handgun in a bar fight. Okay? "9/11." There's a drought in the Midwest. "9/11." The deficit's up. "9/11" You know? But, I think we need to fight them on that. I think, frankly they did a piss-poor job of defending us, and their strategy was always "we'll fight them over there so we don't fight them here." Well guess what, bin Laden didn't get the memo. He wants to fight us here as well as we saw in London last week. And so, the- their theory is, "we can't really do everything to protect our country because we have to cut taxes for the rich." And so, it... they want to kill us- particularly this city and New York and some other places. I was driving past the pentagon when that plane hit. I had friends on that plane, this is deadly serious to me- they want to kill me and my children if they can. But if they just kill me and not my children, they want my children to be comforted that while they didn't protect me because they cut my taxes, my children won't have to pay any money on the money they inherit. You know, that is bullshit national defense and we should say that.
Sure, Begala could have been more precise in dealing with these pronouns. But save for referencing Bush's "friends" Begala doesn't say "Republicans," nor does he say "terrorists." We're assuming this is because most people with comprehension above a fourth-grade level would realize that Begala was referring to terrorists as the "they" who want to kill us.
So which is it: Do these right-wing journalists have the comprehension skills of elementary-schoolers, or are they lying on purpose?
!
comments I heard I am concerned with.
Namely,Jamal Simmons, former press secretary for
the Wesley Clarke presidential campaign SAID THIS
WORD FOR WORD: “Well, for the most part, I
think you are, uh, not necessarily, the
possibility, as a press person, as a
communications person, is not necessarily, to be
the most accurate person on the record, but you do
have to be truthful. When I say you have to be
accurate I do mean, you wanna to tell the story
that tells your side of it the best you can based
on the facts that you have.”
It's not smearing if progressives come out and say
this. It's progressives screwing up.
How can I be expected to stay with a movement who
does and says these things?
Begala also specifically mentioned "they" wanting to kill us in New York and DC- the two cities attacked by bin Laden in 2001. Are you really suggesting there's confusion as to who Begala was referring to in that reference? Last time I checked the only pundit who specifically wished for a terrorist bombing in New York was Ann Coulter - (http://www.campusprogress.org/tools/110/)
You're right, it's not smearing if progressives come out and say this. Paul Begala never did and you can click right up there for the proof.
highlight the positive. You make your case for
something using the facts that support it and
by
saying why the arguments against it are wrong.
If
you'd prefer that liberals not do this, then I
don't know what to tell you.
What he was really saying is that you need to
be
truthful and not just flatout lie, something
you'd understand if you had heard the comments
by
Phil Schiliro, Waxman's Chief of Staff,
immediately proceeding his. Its a difficult job to
do, but what Mr. Simmons was saying is that you
need to be honest and truthful in that, and not do
it the way the Republicans do and just make up the
facts, or change them to fit your story.
have so poisoned the public discourse that
they
actually can't tell the difference between
someone
talking about terrorists and someone talking
about
them.
Know why the Bush Administration outed Valerie
Plame? Becuase her husband said something true
that made the President look bad.
Republicans have truly devolved from a
political
party into a faction. They really can't tell
the
difference between their political
opponents--who
are using the institutions of a free democracy
to
further public discussion and to check and
balance
the executive's power--and the nation's
enemies,
who are blowing up innocent people.
It comes as no surprise that they project this
insane worldview onto Democrats. They see no
difference between the Republican party's
opponents and America's enemies--why should Democrats? I swear, it's Nixon redux.
Let's call this a draw. Yes, you're right.
Drudge
shouldn't have made that connection
specifically,
because it is fairly obvious that he was
talking
about terrorists at the beginning of his
tirade.
But, unfortunately, your party leaders have
made so many over the top accusations, this
type
of
thing wouldn't surprise us coming from a
Democrat. That's why it was taken this way, I
think.
Just another example of how hateful the
Democratic
party leaders are towards their opponents.
But you gotta admit when he says this part:
The use of "they" has no transition in ownership.
So what are we to think of this? The "they"
magically went from terrorists to Republicans,
with only a comma to separate the two? Well,
giving him the benefit of the doubt, I'd say
yes.
But if he had been a bit less hateful in his
tirade towards Republicans, he might have gotten
his point across better and been taken more
seriously to boot.
One more thing... although I've been very civil
in
my comment here, I'm sure I'll get very hateful
emails and responses to this. Watch.
I wonder why that is? Hmmm..
Best Wishes,
Dan
That's the whole point, isn't it? To take his comments in context? That sort of makes your conclusion to "call this a draw" a denial that his comment was taken out of context.
By the way, party leaders on both sides make over the top accusations...
popular X-Man, claiming it's representative of
OTHER statements OTHER people made.
And then Dan Sherman says it's because other
people have made outrageous statements, so we
shouldn't be suprised, it's not the press'
fault.
Dan, how can everybody overflow your inbox with
death threats and rants about destroying America
when there is no e-mail to send to? hmmm
Dan when you said 'let's call this a draw' were you suggesting a violent quickdraw contest?!
I couldn't tell from your transitions.
Bush and other right wingers, so it comes as no
suprise that conservatives want to do it right
back. When a person speaks publically, chances are
that someone can pick at the transcript of their
speech and make them look like an idiot.
I have to agree one can misinterpret what he said
based on reading the transcript, and I also know that I had no trouble understanding what he meant as I listened to him at the conference. But until the
left comes to a point where we don't get such a
kick out of the verbal blunders made by
conservatives, we can't justifiably get mad when
conservatives do it right back.
The facts stand stronger than jokes or
misinterpreted speeches, and we are on the right
side of those facts.
Like I said over on Betsy Newmark's page, this is like progressives honestly saying that President Bush meant it when he said he never stopped thinking of ways to hurt the United States. It was a verbal gaffe the intended meaning of which was clear. It was also a humorous one. So we laughed about it. None of us claimed that Bush was actually sending a veiled message that he wanted to hurt America.
I can't believe that the same group of people that so often claim to be South Park Conservatives and hip and open can be so downright moronic at times. I think the whole "conservatives are idiots" thing is a bit rough at times, but when you start highlighting commas as a way of understanding the spoken word, you're lapsing into dangerous territory.
And this isn't a hateful response. Calling someone a moron isn't hateful. Straight up rewriting someone's speech to say they hate the opposition, especially coming from the toxic pieces of refuse who write books like "Treason" -- well, this is shit that I have no time for.
as it is clear that Begalla can be understood, in
context, to claim that
Republicans/conservatives/the current
administration wants to kill him and his kids.
Possiby in a hyperventilating condition he
misspoke but as to the actual transcript he does
make that aspersion.
Beginning with the sentence... "And so, the-
their theory is, "we can't really do everything
to
protect our country because we have to cut
taxes
for the rich.""... he begins his identification of
"they" as Republicans/conservatives/the current
administration.
Now in the next immediate sentence he may have
flopped back to terriorists but then again his
rant, again in the larger context, is against
the
administration not protecting us because the
terriorists hit London. So this sentence ..."And
so, it... they want to kill us- particularly this
city and New York and some other places." could
just as easily refer to a conspiracy theory of the
left-wing that Republicans/conservatives/the
current administration don't really care about
this country.
So far the references have been to Republicans et
al. and here he makes his infamous statement ..."I
was driving past the pentagon when that plane hit.
I had friends on that plane, this is deadly
serious to me- they want to kill me and my
children if they can." IN CONTEXT it still can
refer to Republicans/conservatives/the current
administration.
This is strongly supported by the easily
identifiable reference of "they" in the next
sentence that cannot in any imagination refer to
terriorists.
He said, "But if they just kill me and not my
children, they want my children to be comforted
that while they didn't protect me because they cut
my taxes...". Do terriorists want to have his
children comforted? NO. Did the terriorists cut
his taxes leaving he and his children susceptible
to being killed? NO.
Clearly, IN CONTEXT and with more then a 4th
grade
education, Paul Begala put his foot in his mouth
and made some incredibly dangerous rants.
So all of those reports have not been off base,
but
have only been accurate in exposing the
extreme
left-wing anger, venting, and propagandizing
that often occurs. Now all that is left is for
Paul to
become chairman of the DNC. These comments
sure
make him qualified.
Begala was pointing out that terrorists want to kill us, that is their sole mission, and by not stepping forward and leading in protecting America, and utilizing leadership that calls for shared sacrifice to secure our nation, we have increased the risk of another terrorist attack by leaps and bounds. Oh yeah, by taking misguided democracy installation tours that fuel terrorism you can multiply those risks by about 10. Republicans HAVE NOT DONE ENOUGH TO PROTECT THIS COUNTRY AND WE NEED TO SAY IT! That is what his statement is saying. Republicans have not done enough to protect our country, our children, grandchildren, friends, neighbors, and because of that, Begala’s family (and yours) are at greater risk for a terrorist attack then prior to September 11th. That is what he is saying and that is the reality. The truth hurts, doesn't it?
We have ceded this debate over and over again, when Democrats are much more equipped to handle, and have a proven track record of properly securing and defending our nation. It’s just that Begala had the balls to say it and no other progressive has. I stand by his statement and ask that people quit being so ridiculously sensitive and be equally as brave as he in declaring the absolute piss poor job Republicans have done in defending our nation. Quit playing into the Republican media machine. Hell, they don’t need a press release, progressives are doing a good job of tearing ourselves apart.
This isn't a partisan complaint. It's being annoyed with bad journalism. This is just as bad as when the right blew up over Dan Rather not checking his sources.
It's folks like VW who need to go back to fourth grade.
'Republicans want to kill him and his children to
preserve tax cuts for the rich'"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507200001
Right on. Leave no attack unanswered.
And thanks for playing.... MISSING THE POINT! It wasn't that Begala was being oh-so-hateful and typical Dummycrap hate, it was the fact that HIS COMMENTS COULD NEVER BE CONSTRUED AS HATEFUL AT FACE VALUE AND COULD ONLY BE INTERPRETED AS SUCH THROUGH DISTORTION AND SELECTIVE QUOTING.
Actually, I'd like to see more trolls in the individual diaries. It'd not only really spice things up, it'll show how intellectually more immature they really are through comparison.