gotcha politics
Why do self-styled political analysts prefer the "gotcha" game rather than substantive debate? Because such analysts are more concerned with short-term political advantage only, bereft of principle. Case in point:
Mark Kilmer of RedState.org takes a low shot at Howard Dean, using this excerpt from the transcript of Dean's Meet The Press appearance this weekend.
Dean says OBL when he meant to say Saddam Hussein, above. Slip of the tounge and all that. Kilmer crows about the slipup, but I couldn't find where he similarly castigated George W. Bush for precisely the same error during the first debate with John Kerry:
In the context of the debate, Bush's slipup was demonstrably more serious - because the decision to go to war hinged in no small part upon the very issue of how relevant Saddam was to 9-11. Given that the Downing Street Memo pretty much establishes that war with Iraq was a fait accompli, I think that Bush supporters are treading on thin ice indeed to draw too much attention to Dean's slipup.
This gotcha game is really a diversion from honest, principled debate. Because both Bush during that debate and Dean during the Meet The Press segment above had valid points, upon which a truly informative discussion between dissenting opinions could be constructed. Sadly, the likelihood that such a debate will occur is slim, if it involved self-styled Republicanists rather than true conservatives.
Mark Kilmer of RedState.org takes a low shot at Howard Dean, using this excerpt from the transcript of Dean's Meet The Press appearance this weekend.
MR. RUSSERT: "Well, you said there were weapons of mass destruction."
DR. DEAN: "I said I wasn't sure, but I said I thought there probably were. But the thing that really bothered me the most, which the 9-11 Commission said also wasn't true, is the insinuation that the president continues to make to this day that Osama bin Laden had something to do with supporting terrorists that attacked the United States. That is false. The 9-11 Commission, chaired by a Republican, said it was false. Is it wrong to send people to war without telling them the truth. And the truth was Osama bin Laden was a very bad person who was doing terrible things, but that Iraq was never a threat to the United States. That was the truth."
Dean says OBL when he meant to say Saddam Hussein, above. Slip of the tounge and all that. Kilmer crows about the slipup, but I couldn't find where he similarly castigated George W. Bush for precisely the same error during the first debate with John Kerry:
BUSH: Of course we're after Saddam Hussein -- I mean bin Laden.
In the context of the debate, Bush's slipup was demonstrably more serious - because the decision to go to war hinged in no small part upon the very issue of how relevant Saddam was to 9-11. Given that the Downing Street Memo pretty much establishes that war with Iraq was a fait accompli, I think that Bush supporters are treading on thin ice indeed to draw too much attention to Dean's slipup.
This gotcha game is really a diversion from honest, principled debate. Because both Bush during that debate and Dean during the Meet The Press segment above had valid points, upon which a truly informative discussion between dissenting opinions could be constructed. Sadly, the likelihood that such a debate will occur is slim, if it involved self-styled Republicanists rather than true conservatives.
Comments