Letters to the Editor
-
Re: Plame Games
The news story lines generally have been that the Plame leak was an effort to discredit Mr Wilson, by suggesting it was boondoggle, that he was a girly-man, etc.
But it seems more plausible to me that Wilson was not the intended target of the leak; that Plame herself and her colleagues at "Brewseter Jennings" were the real target. Her office was investigating the Niger/uranium docs, after all. That investigation may have been dangerous to the WHIG if they knew the docs to be forgeries. Outing the group could have been an attempt to end its activities.
-
Plame Games
It's frustrating to find in Salon the sort of lazy journalism that takes a presumptive "truth must lie somewhere in the middle" position.
Michael Scherer's account of Republican pronouncements on the Fitzgerald investigation more than adequately supports his characterization of them as "spin", which I take to mean "a recasting of facts in a dubious if not outright false narrative".
But I'm at a loss to see what, in the quotes attributed to Dean or any other Democrat, merits that description. Is there any doubt that Bush & co. were less than straight with the public about the reasons for war in Iraq? Is there any doubt that that is the real reason anyone cares, or should care, about this whole story?
If I want "fair and balanced", I'll tune in to Fox News. I read Salon for the straight story.
-
Hear Hear
I'd like to second the opinion, expressed by Russell Durbin above, that Scherer's article fails to distinguish between pure 'spin' and substantive political argument.
Reporting on opposing strategies simply as strategies--without evaluating their underlying truth-claims--seems to me to be irresoponsible. I think we should go back to the old practice of calling 'spin' only that which attempts to cover up facts to which most reasonable people would agree. Calling everything 'spin' suggests that there can be no truth that supercedes political boundaries--or that as a nation, we're so into being liberals or conservatives or whatever that we aren't interested in things like fairness and reality. I think the people as a whole still make the distinction; but I think journalists tend to lose sight of it, and get sucked into permanent horse-racing.
-
Stop With The Euphuisms!
For more than three years now, we have heard the Bush administration accused of being "misleading" about the war in Iraq. We have heard them be accused of "dissembling" about the economy, Plamegate, taxes, healthcare, etc. The truth is that George W. Bush lied repeatedly about the facts he used to support his war in Iraq. It is no different than the lie Lyndon B. Johnson told regarding the events in the Gulf of Tonkin some 40 years ago to support a war in Viet Nam. Johnson's lie cost more that 58,000 dead American soldiers. Bush's lie has cost about 2000 dead American soldiers and counting. By the time we have spent 15 years in Iraq, we will be approaching another 58,000 dead American Soldiers based on a lie. George W. Bush is not "misleading" and he is not "dissembling." He is a liar and we should always describe him as such.
-
Who is Leading Whom?
I am inclined to think that Charles Krauthammer is taking his directions from the White House rather than the other way around. I think he is a lot like Judy Miller in that he will write whatever is passed to him from Rove and co. in order to assist the Bush administration.
-
The Wheels Are Coming Off
For the first time since Bush was elected, I'm feeling optimistic about the future. As Michael Scherer reminds us in "Plame Games," the GOP spin is playing right into the Dems hands and finally, it seems as though this administration is on its way to being hoist on its own petard. But who would have thought it would be a buttoned-down, straight-laced prosecutor who would throw the wrench into the Bush war machine? Let us hope he indicts not just Scooter Libby (seriously, how can anyone trust someone named "Scooter"?) but Herr Rove as well. The RovePublicans are in for a kicking, and none too soon.
-
spin?
The author states: "Such disclosures play right into the Democratic spin on the Fitzgerald investigation." "Spin" insinuates a statement that is less than honest. But if what the Dems are saying is, in fact, true, is it still spin? Americans justly feel betrayed by their politicians and cynical about the veracity of any statement out of Washington, but if something emerges that is, indeed, the truth, we ought to be careful not to label it as "spin."
-
No Spin Zone
I completely agree with the other letters posted that Howard Dean's assertion that the Bush administration has been dishonest concerning Iraq is not "Democratic spin." Rather than characterizing known facts so as to make them seem either more or less damaging (depending on how they they affect one's political "side"), Dean is making a direct statement about a set of facts, a statement that can be evaluated in light of what is already known about the matter. Dean's approach is much more straight forward than the usual political spin and smear techniques, which have the goal of distracting listeners from the issue at hand. Of course, you can always disagree with the assertion Dean made, but spinning is something quite different from what Dean was doing.