Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

VIDEO-Countdown on the transcription alteration

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
liveoaktx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 08:53 PM
Original message
VIDEO-Countdown on the transcription alteration
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
medeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. that was fast! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks, liveoaktx!
May I cross-post in the Keith Olbermann/Countdown Group?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liveoaktx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Sure
He's the man!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. That he is, doll.
Come by anytime, we'd love to have you over for drinks and snark. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. Sorry To Say Folks, But In The Interest Of Truth...
and fair play it looks and sounds to me like he said, "that's inaccurate". Lets try to keep it clean.

Jay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yes, but at this point that's not even the point.
The point is that the White House insists that the transcript be changed to something which Scotty-Mouth most definitely did not say.

I agree, it could be, "That's inaccurate." OTOH, I don't have state-of-the-art equipment which will allow me to slow down the video and watch his mouth while the sound is coming out s-l-o-w-l-y.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. It IS The Point.
Edited on Thu Nov-10-05 09:21 PM by jayfish
Because it's starting to look like a game of tit-for-tat, gothca. You don't need a machine to see him shake his head no and say "that's inaccurate" in a hurried, crescendo fashion. We don't need to go after these little things when we have then by the balls on the big things.Both the transcript and the White House are wrong so lets just call offsetting penalties and move on.

Jay

TYPO EDIT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. It's beyond tit-for-tat and gotcha.
The White House wants the transcripts changed to something which was most definitely not spoken. Surely they have reviewers of video who can look at Scott and come up with the same thing you saw/heard. So, why didn't they go with "That's inaccurate"?

AFAIC, there are two points, anyway:

1. Scott did not say "I don't think that's accurate;
2. The White House is trying to manipulate the truth.

Yes, there are many issues on which to hang them. But the biggest issue is their credibility. Does this not go to the heart of their credibility, that they cannot even say perhaps that Scott misspoke but are actually trying to create words which never existed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. We Disagree.
:shrug:

Jay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. I guess we do.

But it's okay, that's what we're here for. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JWS Donating Member (298 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. "That's accurate"
He said that, he didn't nod. It was as clear as day...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Well, no one's saying he used those words.
If it were that simple, you'd think the WH would want the transcript to read as such.

But no, they want to cram three extra syllables in, before Scotty even opens his mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Man, John Belushi Would Be Proud.
I can see him saying the whole bit. Please don't take that as a slam. The point is salient, but just think about how petty it seems. Let's let the two parties work it out and not turn it into a national incident.

Jay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. No slam perceived.
As someone who prefers to be as certain as possible before weighing in, and isn't worried about saying so, I appreciate where you're coming from.

Otherwise, it's all just preaching to the choir, isn't it?

Cheers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. Scotty-Mouth slipped on a Freudian banana peel
"That's accurate."

But as Keith pointed out, it seemed Scott was shaking his head rather than nodding it. BTW, at one point it sounded like Keith phrased Scott as saying "That's inaccurate." Somewhere before the 3-minute mark. Does anyone else hear him say that?

Thanks, liveoaktx.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mme. Defarge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Sorry,
but every time I have watched this, it looks to me like McClellan is ever so slightly nodding his head in agreement. Then, he looks like he is listening intently, and ultimately mutters, as if to himself, "That's accurate."

I think his body language actually matches what he says, which is "That's accurate."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Maybe I should watch it again.
But that means I'll have to watch the whole thing, and I can't stand to look at Scotty. Maybe it was my own head shaking side to side, LOL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. And as Greg Mitchell of E&P said:
Scotty "committed truth". Oopsie. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buzzard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
13. Liveoaktx I am having trouble viewing anything at canofun any tips?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBHagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
18. Disconnect between movement and words.
If you read McClellan's lips, you can see him form the words "That's accurate." As he says that, though, he gives a little shake of the head. Oddly, just before that, he's nodding slightly at what David Gregory is saying.

McClellan should have just said, "Whoops! Didn't mean to say that." Then the incident would be over. Instead, the White House is trying to throw its weight around. Give it up, clowns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. These aren't the 'droids you're looking for.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain...
Nothing to see here, just move along, now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 23rd 2014, 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC