Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lugsoul
Apperantly, you are having a selective reading problem. Let me breakdown the paragraph for you.

I said (again):
"I am affirming your right to disagree with the President. I am affirming your right to even malign the President."

Then, I said:
"I disagree with your tactic of accusing others of spinning while you seem to be spinning yourself (e.g., using only parts of Novak's statements and parts of the White House Counsel statements).

Do you not understand what reading in context is?

1) I say it is ok to disagee and, then a step further
2) I said that you can even malign him (should you choose to do so)
3) I said you were using a tactic of accusing others of spin while you are spinning yourself, and I cited two instances (below) where you had parsed out statements or mischaracterized something just to fit your opinion.

Here are the two example (within this thread):

Post #52 - One of your parsed statements about the White House statement
(You incorrectly paraphrase the White House Counsel memo...that's spin).

Post #16 - A post with your assertion about "Novak's unsourced assertion"
(Novak's assertion wasn't unsourced. It was a confidential source, not unsourced. Again, you didn't like that you don't know who the source was, so you discredit it...that's spin.)

I objected to your spinning, while accusing others of spinning. I never said that you had maligned the President.

75 posted on 10/01/2003 10:04:45 AM PDT by mattdono
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: mattdono
"I never said that you had maligned the President."

"It is ok that you want to be here on FR to malign the President."

Your statements speak for themselves. I guess you meant that I "want to" be here to malign the President, but just haven't gotten around to it yet. As to how you would know that unless I had done so - that's as much a mystery as how a man letting people know his wife's name qualifies as "outing" her as CIA.

Did the White House statement refer to her as an undercover CIA employee? Yes. No spin there.

Did Novak say that the CIA officially told him she was "covered?" Yes. No spin there.

You are right - I said "unsourced." I guess I should have said "confidential source not corroborated by any other information whose statement dovetails nicely with Novak's personal interest in this issue." That's spin, just so you'll recognize it next time.

77 posted on 10/01/2003 10:38:38 AM PDT by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

To: mattdono
Why don't you try to spin away your original statement, instead of relying on your attempt to explain your original statement? Oh, that's right. You can't. So you try misdirection. I guess you can recognize spin, after all - when you want to.

A 5-year-old can see that your initial response to me was to cast my post as an attempt to smear the President. You can run away from it all you want, but it is plain as day.

79 posted on 10/01/2003 10:55:56 AM PDT by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson