CROSSROADS COMMENT -- MoveOn Ad -- Charlie Rose Mushes It in Mashup
The Back Story
On Sept. 12, Slate co-sponsored the first-ever online-only presidential mashup with Yahoo! and the Huffington Post. Armed with your questions, Charlie Rose asked the top Democratic presidential candidates about their views on health care, Iraq, education, and other issues.
______________
Here's Charlie Rose, the unqualified Thomas Friedman admirer, trying to ask John Edwards a question:
Rose: Let me ask you one last question about Iraq, because it's part of the political debate in some quarters. Moveon.org's advertisement, do you think it was the appropriate thing to do?
Edwards: I don't know if I've seen it, Charlie. Tell me what it is.
Rose: Basically they used Petraeus in a play off of betrayal. General Betrayal.
This exchange with John Edwards casts light on one thing and one thing only, Charlie Rose's ineptitude. Edward's may be distancing himself from MoveOn (for whatever reason), but Rose, in the way he states the question ("one last question about Iraq, because it's part of the political debate in some quarters") and then his being totally uninformed about the content of the ad says to me--do your homework Charlie boy.
Everyone should take a close look at this ad. [The ad and MoveOn documentation is HERE]
The bold heading everyone misquotes and truncates reads if full as follows:
"General Petraeus or General Betray Us?
Cooking the Books for the White House"
This is followed by a couple of paragraphs of the standard stuff we all know about, primarily the Bush penchant for cherry-picking the evidence on the levels of violence in Iraq in order to justify the Surge. Administration lies are revealed again. All of MoveOn's supportive statements can be easily verified in number of sources.
Given this evidence, is "General Betray Us" too harsh? Well, the title does end with a question mark. It may be a rhetorical question, but the reader is given an opening to decide for her/himself. This is a democracy, we have more than one Great Decider, right?
So Charlie, did you even read the ad before asking your lame question? Or did you just assume that with all those medals, his deferential boyish manner and a Princeton PhD this water boy for Bush should get a free ride? And is that just what Bush is counting on?
We got this.
But egad! Remember this?
On Sept. 12, Slate co-sponsored the first-ever online-only presidential mashup with Yahoo! and the Huffington Post. Armed with your questions, Charlie Rose asked the top Democratic presidential candidates about their views on health care, Iraq, education, and other issues.
______________
Here's Charlie Rose, the unqualified Thomas Friedman admirer, trying to ask John Edwards a question:
Rose: Let me ask you one last question about Iraq, because it's part of the political debate in some quarters. Moveon.org's advertisement, do you think it was the appropriate thing to do?
Edwards: I don't know if I've seen it, Charlie. Tell me what it is.
Rose: Basically they used Petraeus in a play off of betrayal. General Betrayal.
This exchange with John Edwards casts light on one thing and one thing only, Charlie Rose's ineptitude. Edward's may be distancing himself from MoveOn (for whatever reason), but Rose, in the way he states the question ("one last question about Iraq, because it's part of the political debate in some quarters") and then his being totally uninformed about the content of the ad says to me--do your homework Charlie boy.
Everyone should take a close look at this ad. [The ad and MoveOn documentation is HERE]
The bold heading everyone misquotes and truncates reads if full as follows:
"General Petraeus or General Betray Us?
Cooking the Books for the White House"
This is followed by a couple of paragraphs of the standard stuff we all know about, primarily the Bush penchant for cherry-picking the evidence on the levels of violence in Iraq in order to justify the Surge. Administration lies are revealed again. All of MoveOn's supportive statements can be easily verified in number of sources.
Given this evidence, is "General Betray Us" too harsh? Well, the title does end with a question mark. It may be a rhetorical question, but the reader is given an opening to decide for her/himself. This is a democracy, we have more than one Great Decider, right?
So Charlie, did you even read the ad before asking your lame question? Or did you just assume that with all those medals, his deferential boyish manner and a Princeton PhD this water boy for Bush should get a free ride? And is that just what Bush is counting on?
We got this.
But egad! Remember this?
posted by gary daily | 9:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home