This morning's C-Span showed how CONFUSED people are already!!

[Sparkly]

Rove and the RNC wasted no time in spinning this week's revelations, and just 10 minutes listening to C-Span callers showed how CLUEless and CONFUSED people are -- not only because the information is limited and somewhat confusing, but because their heads are spinning with rightwing "talking points."

Some of the falsehoods spinning around are:

1. "As soon as the Preznit says the information can be released, it's declassified." WRONG. There is a procedure for declassifying materials, and it's at best unclear what the procedure is and whether that procedure was followed.

2. "The NIE information was clearly declassified when Libby spoke to reporters." WRONG. According to transcripts of Scottie, whatever declassification took place (of whatever portions were actually declassified), it occurred 10 days after Libby leaked.

3. "It's obvious the Preznit did nothing illegal." WRONG. There's no indication that the information was declassified when Chimpy approved Libby's leaks, and it's not at all clear that merely saying "you can tell it" automatically declassifies it. (Further, not all the information Libby provided, at the Preznit's approval, is yet known.)

4. "Anytime important information is given to reporters, it's a GOOD thing." WRONG. And if this was on the up-and-up, why could Libby only be referred to as a mysterious, unnamed "White House official?" Why all the secrecy, if they believed what they were doing was legitimate, legal, and merely a routine matter of releasing important information to the public?

5. "It's clear the Preznit didn't authorize leaking Valerie Plame's name." WRONG. It is far from clear, and it's looking, walking and quacking like a duck. The timing of the leak, the fact that it was all about discrediting Wilson's report and article, and the fact her name was a central part of the package Libby gave to reporters all point to White House knowledge. Further, when it came to the question of "who leaked her name to Cooper and Miller et al," it shouldn't have been a real stretch for the WH to come up with Libby even IF they hadn't authorized him to supply that info. Again, why were they covering up?

6. "Valerie Plame is a non-issue anyway. She wasn't really covert." WRONG. It's incredible that this old lie is still around. What do these idiots think the investigation is about?? (Callers also mentioned that she "hired her husband" -- WRONG -- and that it somehow vindicated the Preznit that "only part of the NIE was declassified -- the part about Wilson" which, if true, is far from a vindication!!)

And what keeps getting swept under the rug is the fact that all of this is about THE INVASION OF IRAQ.

How did people get so confused in the first place? Same way they've gotten confused about everything: a media too lazy or too biased to do anything but repeat righwing SPIN. See the whole tangled mess of media confusion here: http://mediamatters.org/

[tanyev]

1. The people saying those things are not confused.

They are willfully ignorant.

[emulatorloo]

14. or paid Rove operatives. EOM

[sandnsea]

30. When will we figure that out

And get our asses on the phones to counter them with our own talking points instead of repeating theirs. :grr:

[Arkansas Granny]

31. You've hit the nail squarely on the head. They are so determined

to not be proven wrong about their support for this dangerous administration, that they will continue to spout these lies, even as they choke on them.

[quiet.american]

2. We need to bring up it was stated it was an act of revenge.

The first reports of this had a "senior official" clearly stating that two senior WH officials called up at least six reporters to inform on Valerie Plame purely as an act of revenge for Joseph Wilson having called Bush out on his lies.

And Scott McClellan still stands up there and says this treason was committed because the WH couldn't let "the clear falsehoods stand" -- and no WH reporter then asks him, "so, you're saying Iraq did try to purchase yellowcake from Niger, after that's been debunked as ridiculous and untrue? Is that what you're saying, Scott?"

[TankLV]

28. More: He's using the SECURITY OF THE US FOR POLITICAL PERSNAL PUPOSES

He is ENDANGERING National Security.

EVERYTHING this LYING War Criminal does is for his own POLITICAL PURPOSES, STARTING WITH STARTING HIS ILLEGAL WAR!

Revenge? It's for PERSONAL POLITICAL PURPOSES!

[quiet.american]

32. Yes, and as we know revenge is part and parcel of Bush politics. n/t

[valerief]

3. Nice list. And I agree with tanyev. n/t

[WoodrowFan]

4. nice summary. (NT)

[HockeyMom]

5. Attacking and invading a sovereign nation

under false pretenses has to come under TREASON. Conspiracy to defraud the USA is a Felony. It doesn't just apply to money and the IRS. Cooking the books, so to speak. DELIBERATELY LYING to Congress, in itself also a Felony (look it up), etc.

Outing Plume was just the means to an end = WAR.

[thinkingwoman]

6. Plants are not confused

They're just earning their paychecks.

[EarlG]

7. They can justify it all they like

They still have to deal with the elephant in the living room: Bush went out time and again and said he wanted to get to the bottom of this, yet he was in on it from the beginning. He flat out lied over and over about his involvement and his knowledge of the situation.

Republicans can argue about whether or not it was legal until they're blue in the face (red in the face?) but the fact remains that George has dug himself a hole here that he can't climb out of.

[Sparkly]

8. Here's the line in their script on that...

"Well, he was talking about the leak of Valerie Plame's name. We all know he didn't leak her name."

Of course, "we all know" because he said so; and as for everything else that was leaked, leaks aren't leaks if he authorizes them (the "instant declassification" idea) so supposedly, that's completely irrelevant.

Which leads to one more point: If leaks aren't leaks once the preznit says "go ahead and tell," then couldn't he say "go ahead and tell that Joe Wilson's wife is a CIA agent" and Presto -- no leak!? Instant declassification!!

[NV Whino]

10. We send roses to

Boxer and Thomas. Let's send shovels to Bush.

[gristy]

9. Wow! I'm impressed!

That's a lot of reasons!

[tsuki]

11. Too many spins. Too many talking points. They are out of

control.

[Jack Rabbit]

12. Thank you

We're still going to have to work on setting some facts straight. This shows how well the GOP noise machine works and that there is nothing they say, no matter how absurd and ridiculous, that ought to be ignored just because it is absurd or ridiculous. I'll bet a lot of people still think Al Gore claimed to have invented the Internet or that Bush had a better war record in Vietnam than Kerry.

What the revelations of the last couple of days show is that Bush played politics with national security and lied about it. Whether it's illegal or not is beside the point. It's wrong, dangerous and impeachable.

[ktowntennesseedem]

13. Your post should be required DU reading!

I haven't been watch much news programming lately, but in the brief clips I did catch and in "water-cooler" type chat, I have already overheard most of the Repukes' talking points above. Thanks for these clean, concise come-backs to their lies; it won't stop their lies, but responses like those just might set them back a bit.

[greenman3610]

15. please tell me again

the reason she was considered covert is because she
had worked overseas in that capacity within 5 years,
is that correct?

[Vincardog]

16. She was covert because for the last x years she was working for Brewster

Williams (A cover front company for the CIA) and any Revelation of the fact that she was CIA would and did jeopardies hundreds of agents and sources.

aWoL shut down Valarie Plane to shut down the WMD investigation.

[Sparkly]

18. Brewster Jennings....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Jennings_%26_Associates

[Sparkly]

17. She was covert

Larry Johnson confirms your 5-year standard:
The law actually requires that a covered person “served” overseas in the last five years. Served does not mean lived. In the case of Valerie Wilson, energy consultant for Brewster-Jennings, she traveled overseas in 2003, 2002, and 2001, as part of her cover job. She met with folks who worked in the nuclear industry, cultivated sources, and managed spies. She was a national security asset until exposed by Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/11/is_max_boot_usi.html

It was stated right away that she'd been covert:
Intelligence officials confirmed to Newsday yesterday that Valerie Plame, wife of retired Ambassador Joseph Wilson, works at the agency on weapons of mass destruction issues in an undercover capacity - at least she was undercover until last week when she was named by columnist Robert Novak.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4190.htm

[spooky3]

19. k&r

[theobscure]

20. what is really lacking is a willingness to make a moral judgment

Instead of arguing over the legal technicalities, political ramifications, or social consequences, people should be asking themselves if we really want a president who engages in this kind of behavior. We sit back and wait for this President, or any number of other political officials who have betrayed the public trust or acted immorally, to have his hand caught in the legal cookie jar. Or, we wait for other public officials to slap him on the wrist.

If we are truly offended by the immoral behavior of our elected officials, we should use the power of the people to call them to task. This is exactly what the people of Thailand did just recently. They seem to have a better handle on what democracy means than we do.

[FrenchieCat]

22. Good point, except that we are living in a real world.....so

what should be done and what is done are not the same, nor will they be for a long time, if ever.

It is not a question as to whether we are truly offended by immoral behavior, because many of us are....

The question is, can the American masses who rely on unreliable news information that slants to the border of confusion make the correct moral judgement (considering that many are misinformed) ..... about the truth.....and can we, the ones that know the truth, get them to understand the true bounds of corruption and illigalities that represents this White House.

Without the media doing its job, it becomes much more difficult to get this done.

[theobscure]

25. well if the people of Thailand have done it...

why can't we? I've never been there; but I'm assuming both countries exist in the same real world.

Yes, the media are a bunch of gutless corporate shills. But to put this all off on them is wishful thinking.

The problem is the only voice of opposition people hear (Democrats in this case) are inconsistent, hypocritical, blindly partisan and amoral. The reason: Both sides ultimately have a common, underlying essential motive. Power. Entrenched. Insulated. Unaccountable. Absolute. They'll argue on the surface of things with their partisan bickering; but when push comes to shove, they will close rank to protect the status quo and the power they mutually enjoy.

Where were the Democrats when it came to exposing the truth about 9/11? Complicit. Where were the Democrats when it came to the Patriot Act? Complicit. Where were the Democrats when it came to the Iraq? Complicit. Where were Democrats when it came to renewal of the Patriot Act? Complicit again.

The only reason Democrats are making noise now about war under false pretenses is because the neo-cons bungled the planning for and management of the occupation. If Wolfowitz and co. had pulled this off, the Democrats would be on the bandwagon bound for Iran by now. The whole WMD misinformation, and the leaks, and the wiretapping and the censure are just partisan tools brought out when politically expedient for a surface rearranging of the political chairs. The Republican and Democrat duopoly remains intact.

This is the larger truth that needs to come out. So while the activist minority in this country read without deviation from the talking points of the party they've chosen, the inactive, apathetic majority see it all as just a game and the media, realizing the minority can't be changed and the majority can't be activated, spend their investigative resources on Muslims at NASCAR events.

[paulk]

24. the situation in thailand is a lot more complicated than that

Thaksin won the election with 57% of the vote. Thaksin had rural support versus city (Bangkok). The money in Thailand is in the city. The political upheaval was causing damage to both the tourist trade and foreign investment. The King stepped in and told Thaksin to resign. The moneyed interests won.

That's not democracy. Your "power of the people" is mob rule.

You don't know what you're talking about.

[theobscure]

26. I didn't imply that it wasn't more complicated....

the only point I was making is that in a democracy there are ways to make your voice heard, immediately if need be. That was the sum total of my equation with Thailand and our situation. I didn't see the relevance of making qualifying statements about the specifics of the particular situation in Thailand.

Yes, some sort of sophistication as to when people should take to the streets is preferable. But to dismiss any type of grassroots uprising to protest the direction of it's government or behavior of it's leaders as mob rule is the same type of simplicity you accuse me of.

Would it not have been better for the German people to take to the streets against Hitler? Were they waiting for him to be impeached? Were they waiting for him to break some particular law to catch him red-handed? When your government usurps power to engage in immoral behavior, sometimes you don't have the luxury, or even privilege, to rely on things like procedure, protocol, or precedent.

Also as a qualifying statement, let me say that our situation falls in between Thailand and Nazi Germany; but more toward the latter. I'm also not talking about violence either. A massive show of non-violent protest should always be the first resort.

[FrenchieCat]

27. My brother lives in Bangkok......

and according to him, Thailand is not who we want to pattern ourselves after.

[ProSense]

21. Why wouldn't people be confused? The MSM is telling them this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2559473&mesg_id=2559473

[Disturbed]

23. The RW Corp Media protects the Neo Fascist Regime.

RW Corp Media was complicit in the push for the Illegal Invasion of Iraq and continues to aid the Bush Regime because most of the Media Owners are pleased with the Monopoly that has been granted them, starting with Pres. Reagon and furthered by Pres. Clinton.

[sandnsea]

29. Keep echoing their points for them, good job!!

Our points are out there, did you call in and say quite simply, Bush said he was going to look for the leaker, why'd he say that when he knew he was looking for himself, or if it was a simple matter of legally declassified material.

Another case of us repeating their talking points, and then blaming Dems for not getting the message out. We're supposed to be a Dem echo chamber, not a right wing one.

[abelenkpe]

33. Were all the callers confused

Or were there some who knew the truth?