Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Catch-Up Questions
Updated with Transcript
But first, one current question: what do "fact checks" have to do with judgement calls? I'll have to see if MSNBC posts an online transcript tomorrow, but I couldn't believe something that I heard in the post-debate "fact check." The "fact-checker," David Shuster, actually said that it was a "stretch" for Hillary Clinton to say that Bush doesn't care about New Orleans*. Shuster also corrected Biden for saying that Bush had ruined the country, he even read the dictionary definition of "ruin." -- Hmm, I better consult my dictionary for this fact check -- He also conducted a similar non-fact check on Edwards. MSNBC may have hit an all-time low in the area post-debate "fact checking." In the past, I expected the fact checkers to make factual errors themselves, but to be so unclear on the concept... Actually, Chris Matthews didn't refer to the segment as a "fact check," but a check on the candidates' "truthfulness."
Has Oyster seen the most recent Boasso ad? Or does Boasso read YRHT?
What's the difference? Keith Hudson writes:
Not a racist, just another white person persecuting a black man.
I wonder Jarvis DeBerry thought of Hudson's opening:
DeBerry thinks that race wouldn't have been an issue if Midura hadn't made it one. Dishonest, through and through.
Don't know how stale this joke is by now, came in an email while I was on vacation.
Old or not, it was a little lame the first time I read it.
*It's too far past my bedtime for an angry diatribe.
Update:
But first, one current question: what do "fact checks" have to do with judgement calls? I'll have to see if MSNBC posts an online transcript tomorrow, but I couldn't believe something that I heard in the post-debate "fact check." The "fact-checker," David Shuster, actually said that it was a "stretch" for Hillary Clinton to say that Bush doesn't care about New Orleans*. Shuster also corrected Biden for saying that Bush had ruined the country, he even read the dictionary definition of "ruin." -- Hmm, I better consult my dictionary for this fact check -- He also conducted a similar non-fact check on Edwards. MSNBC may have hit an all-time low in the area post-debate "fact checking." In the past, I expected the fact checkers to make factual errors themselves, but to be so unclear on the concept... Actually, Chris Matthews didn't refer to the segment as a "fact check," but a check on the candidates' "truthfulness."
Has Oyster seen the most recent Boasso ad? Or does Boasso read YRHT?
What's the difference? Keith Hudson writes:
Letter writer Ann McNeal said I called those speaking against Mr. Jordan "racist." Which is far from the truth, but that's typical of the white community to engage in false propaganda. Any white person who wants to engage in a forum with me about the criminal justice system in New Orleans is invited.
Speaking out on one topic is not genuine concern, but just the voice of another white person exercising his right to persecute another black man.
Not a racist, just another white person persecuting a black man.
I wonder Jarvis DeBerry thought of Hudson's opening:
First of all, let me say that if I offended anybody with my comments to the City Council in support of District Attorney Eddie Jordan, at this orchestrated persecution, guess what? That's was my intent!
We as black people are sick-n-tired of whites not imagining what it's like to live in a crime-ridden neighborhood. We are sick-n-tired of being represented by someone who doesn't live in our neighborhood.
DeBerry thinks that race wouldn't have been an issue if Midura hadn't made it one. Dishonest, through and through.
Don't know how stale this joke is by now, came in an email while I was on vacation.
Breaking News: Michael Vick/Aaron Brooks Dog Fighting Case
Breaking News from Richmond , VA :
Asst. United States Attorney Michael Gill announced that Michael Vick's cousin, Aaron Brooks, will not face indictment in the Bad Newz Kennel dog fighting scandal. According to the U.S. Attorney's office, Mr. Brooks' pitbulls failed to show any fighting spirit, did not indicate any will to win, fought only off their back foot, and wouldn't stop smiling when they bit the wrong dog.
Old or not, it was a little lame the first time I read it.
*It's too far past my bedtime for an angry diatribe.
Update:
SHUSTER:
There were a few instances in this forum tonight where Democrats gave some untruthful descriptions of the Bush administration and the impact of administration policies on the nation. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CLINTON: Well, the first thing I would do would put somebody in charge to actually cared about the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast.
SEN. JOE BIDEN, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We know how badly this president has ruined the country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SHUSTER: The use of the word ruin is pretty amazing, Chris, because you think “ruin” is defined as irreparable damage, and for Joe Biden to say the nation is irreparably damaged, is ruined permanently, that is a bit of a stretch. And also you can have arguments about whether it is right policy as far as rebuilding New Orleans and what they‘re doing, but to say that the Bush administration does not care about New Orleans, that‘s a leap.
Comments:
<< Home
Early on in the debate analysis, Matthews asked Eugene Robinson if he thought Edwards had done poorly because he's "such a small man".
I turned the TV off.
I turned the TV off.
# posted by 
: 7:25 AM
: 7:25 AM 
I hadn't seen that particular Boasso ad, but I know for sure that the campaign is aware of YRHT.
Boasso is doing exactly the right thing at this stage-- tying Jindal to Bush to Iraq. The campaign has been doing this for months now in press releases.
Also, the cardboard cutout prop is cute and effective, for the most part. This is what Boasso needs to do to win, in my opinion. (It doesn't mean he will win, but this is the correct tactical play).
Boasso is doing exactly the right thing at this stage-- tying Jindal to Bush to Iraq. The campaign has been doing this for months now in press releases.
Also, the cardboard cutout prop is cute and effective, for the most part. This is what Boasso needs to do to win, in my opinion. (It doesn't mean he will win, but this is the correct tactical play).
I didn't take Clinton's remark to mean Bush didn't care, I took it to mean Donald Powell doesn't care.
But I'm probably wrong.
But I'm probably wrong.
I saw that too, Jeffrey. If I hadn't been washing dishes and doing other things, I'd have probably turned it off too.
I agree Oyster. I expect a runoff, but it's still Jindal's race to lose. If Nagin gets in and starts running an anti-Boasso campaign, we'll know something's up.
I pretty much agree with you mominem. I started to include that in a list of problems with the "truthfulness check," but decided to keep it relatively brief. If she had anybody in mind, it sounded more like Powell, but she might have just meant that the administration response has been uncaring. She certainly didn't say what Shuster said she said.
Obviously Shuster, or MSNBC, put playing it safe above journalistic integrity. He, or they, decided that the way to appear fair or objective was to find fault with all the major candidates. Even if that meant asserting unknowable matters of opinion into a fact and quibbling over whether "ruin' was too strong a word. Now I'm wondering if it's possible that Biden meant Iraq. I don't remember the entire statement, and you can't tell from that clip.
Post a Comment
I agree Oyster. I expect a runoff, but it's still Jindal's race to lose. If Nagin gets in and starts running an anti-Boasso campaign, we'll know something's up.
I pretty much agree with you mominem. I started to include that in a list of problems with the "truthfulness check," but decided to keep it relatively brief. If she had anybody in mind, it sounded more like Powell, but she might have just meant that the administration response has been uncaring. She certainly didn't say what Shuster said she said.
Obviously Shuster, or MSNBC, put playing it safe above journalistic integrity. He, or they, decided that the way to appear fair or objective was to find fault with all the major candidates. Even if that meant asserting unknowable matters of opinion into a fact and quibbling over whether "ruin' was too strong a word. Now I'm wondering if it's possible that Biden meant Iraq. I don't remember the entire statement, and you can't tell from that clip.
<< Home
