11:47 - I Sometimes Forget How You Like to Be Wrong

One of the only things that get matt emotional is politics so he’s fun to bait and debate de temps en temps…

Get up to speed with the original post here, my response here, and his response here.

***********************************************************

You’re missing the point here darling.
I am not defending the reporting. If the report was untrue, they should retract it, just like Memogate. And if they already have, great, even better. That’s already one more apology than the Bush Administration.

I am not attacking the war. Nowhere in my post did I call the war illegal or about oil or whatever else you were going on about. You already know what I think about the war so that’s not the point either.

On se calme… This is about deux trucs:

1. The rightosphere jumping to put the Newsweak scandal (and yes no problem admitting it is a scandal that further damages the deteriorating reputation of the MSM) at the same level of gravity as the Administration taking military action after being misled about WMDs in Iraq. This “Newsweek lied, people died” meme, though cute in a twisted sort of way, is like a little kid who, having eaten almost the cookies in the cookie jar, tattles on their sibling for having had one. It’s just not on the same level. And good for Newsweak for retracting quickly and learning from CBS’s gaffe on the Dan Rather story. Easy to retract a story, hard to retract a war.
   
   
2. More than the scale of the scandal, however, the post was about information. The hypocrisy comment was not aimed as a personal attack on you (though it appears you took it that way) but a criticism of how the Bush Administration handles information. It’s hypocritical to say “We know Iraq has WMDs, we’re going to war over it, but can’t tell you how we know” [I’m sure you’ve seen, though not posted about, the Downing Street Memo scandal which we won’t get into here] or “We can’t release the Guantánamo Bay reports on possible torture or desecration of religious icons” and then expect the media to flawlessly report the news without having some misfires. The Administration has created an atmosphere where they are so reluctant to share information that the suspicion rightfully runs high that they are hiding potentially damaging information.

This isn’t about getting one’s way, or France, or irony, or who I voted for or anything else you threw into the pot. It’s about hypocrisy and information. I’m not so naïve to not understand that the battle between the press and the Oval Office will continue long after the Bush Administration is gone and that there is a certain security invoked in keeping truly classified information classified. But to think the withholding of information from the press is more important than correcting real human rights violation concerns, not only at Abu Ghraib but also at Guantánamo Bay which is what the original story covered, is completely delusional, especially from a man like Bush who purports to value life more than anything else. If 17 people were killed because of the "incendiary acts" don't you think the government should be correcting the behavior of those who committed these acts rather than attacking the messenger ?

But wait, you’re not delusional… you’re just going to an outer space movie with your imaginary paper-skinned movie star wife. My bad.

UPDATE: She says it better than I do.
Also, rest peacefully children, all is well in blogland with mom and dad again.

---