"Let him stay one second."

May 4, 2006 1:50 PM

Newsfilter: Rumsfeld squirms (via).
posted by bardic (104 comments total)

(via).

You don't say.
posted by Kwantsar at 1:53 PM on May 4, 2006

Very worthwhile contribution, this one.
posted by xmutex at 1:57 PM on May 4, 2006

It's especially amusing when the guy after the first guy tells Rumsfeld it's beyond impressive how he handles questions like that. If that impresses him, he's in trouble.
posted by ORthey at 1:58 PM on May 4, 2006

completely pointless. did it for his own gratification, the selfish bastard.
posted by pmbuko at 2:06 PM on May 4, 2006

So, I'm waiting for the news networks to replay this clip:

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."

Right after Rummy denies ever saying it. Because, ya know, that proves 100% that he just lied to our faces.



Go, Liberal Media, Go!




Why aren't you going!?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 2:07 PM on May 4, 2006

QUESTION: You said you knew where [WMDs] they were.

RUMSFELD: I did not. I said I knew where suspect sites were and –

QUESTION: You said you knew where they were Tikrit, Baghdad, northeast, south, west of there. Those are your words.

RUMSFELD: My words — my words were that — no, no, wait a minute, wait a minute. Let him stay one second. Just a second.

The quote from Rummy:

We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

If Rumsfeld WASN'T lying, he's incompetent and ineffectual, and should be removed from his position. If he WAS lying, then he is a lying, scheming warmonger and should be removed from his position.
posted by Help Me Impeach Bush at 2:08 PM on May 4, 2006

Non sequitur , just in case you felt a little lazy, that happens from time to time.

And you gotta BELIEVE , forget fact checking, BELIVE goddamit ! You do that all the time already
posted by elpapacito at 2:10 PM on May 4, 2006

It's especially amusing when the guy after the first guy tells Rumsfeld it's beyond impressive how he handles questions like that.

That guy is a fanboy... He travels the country following Rummy and his speaking engagements. They even have a special section for tapers.

BTW, anyone want to trade a Rummy 01/23/03 Ann Arbor (B+) for some outtakes and demos?
posted by DougieZero1982 at 2:11 PM on May 4, 2006

Indeed, I really wonder whats going on with the news media. How lazy are you to not find the original video clip from "This Week" and play it back to back with this clip? Start showing the complete lack of integrity within the administration already.

These guys act like this new UN Treaty is already in effect and they cant go back and show cilps from other networks... (which could also kill of a large part of The Daily Show).
posted by SirOmega at 2:14 PM on May 4, 2006

(FWIW, C&L is linking to video taken on CNN.)
posted by bardic at 2:18 PM on May 4, 2006

CrooksandliarsFilter.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 2:18 PM on May 4, 2006

Think Progress has a video and info as well.

The man asking questions is a 27 year CIA veteran.
posted by jefbla at 2:19 PM on May 4, 2006

BTW, anyone want to trade a Rummy 01/23/03 Ann Arbor (B+) for some outtakes and demos?

Dude, I got some killer Alpine!
posted by kgasmart at 2:25 PM on May 4, 2006

Arrrggghhh! The TROOPS believed there were chemical weapons?!!! That's Rumsfeld's proof that Zarqawi, as a representative of Al-Queda, had ties to Saddam??? He's not making any sense. I can't believe there are still people (in that room, at least) kissing his ass...
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 2:27 PM on May 4, 2006

Why is there always a "fluffer" around for the follow-up to keep him from going "flaccid"?
posted by jca at 2:32 PM on May 4, 2006

Isn't it a little silly to expect Rumsfeld to remember everything he's ever said perfectly? I mean, maybe he just forgot.
posted by reklaw at 2:34 PM on May 4, 2006

Why do you think that the menu and women in uniform every day when they came out of kuwait and went into iraq put on chemical weapon protective suits? Because they liked the style?

Who do these murderers surround themselves with? Is there a gigantic set of studio indicators out of frame, directing laughter and heckling? Sickening.
posted by prostyle at 2:35 PM on May 4, 2006

Damn, that UN treaty is shite -- thanks for the heads up on that, Omega. At this rate, I'm gonna end up a Bircher.
posted by undule at 2:35 PM on May 4, 2006

Because 95% of the MSM is fluffers.
posted by graventy at 2:35 PM on May 4, 2006

So, I'm waiting for the news networks to replay this clip

MSNBC-TV is playing the clip and has it available on their website, as well.
posted by ericb at 2:36 PM on May 4, 2006

AP HEADLINE: "Rumsfeld Heckled by Former CIA Analyst"

Heckled?
posted by DougieZero1982 at 2:37 PM on May 4, 2006

ABC News and CBS News join the fray.
posted by ericb at 2:39 PM on May 4, 2006

So, I'm waiting for the news networks to replay this clip

On preview, I see that you are referring to Rumsfeld's original claim ("We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat") made by Rummy on "This Week" (March 30, 2003).

Yeah -- let's see if any new outlet plays that to back-up the questioner's reference to it today.
posted by ericb at 2:43 PM on May 4, 2006

They wore the protective suits because they were ORDERED to.

AAARRRRRGGGHHH!!!

How stupid is this old man?
posted by jsavimbi at 2:46 PM on May 4, 2006

Its the Colbert effect!
posted by skallas at 2:47 PM on May 4, 2006

ducksqueezer, that's exactly what I was thinking. As if there wasn't some superior officer ordering them to wear those protective uniforms. For the audience to applaud just tells you how none of them were actually activating their minds.

It truly is a simple case of Our Team vs. Their Team. No thought is necessary...just follow the coach!
posted by NationalKato at 2:48 PM on May 4, 2006

heck·le (hĕk'əl)
tr.v., -led, -ling, -les.
To try to embarrass and annoy (someone speaking or performing in public) by questions, gibes, or objections; badger.
posted by alteredcarbon at 2:51 PM on May 4, 2006

what
posted by cellphone at 2:55 PM on May 4, 2006

surely this will... be... the...
posted by boo_radley at 2:56 PM on May 4, 2006

That audience was surpisingly hostile to the questioner. Did they manage to pack all 33 percent of Bush's supporters into one room in Atlanta?
posted by Astro Zombie at 2:56 PM on May 4, 2006

heck·le (hĕk'əl)
tr.v., -led, -ling, -les.
To try

I'd say it was successful at embarrassing him, and prob. annoyed him.

Ergo - not heckle.
posted by rough ashlar at 2:56 PM on May 4, 2006

CNN, unbiased news reporter:"...and of course, within the speech, came a few protestors..."

Ray McGovern:"You said you knew where they were."

Rumsfeld:"I did not"

Rumsfeld: (as security personnel began ushering McGovern out)"No, no; Wait a minute, wait a minute.Let him stay one second."

Moderator:"I think, Mr. Secretary, the debate is over."

The dog ate my report. Honest. You can't blame anyone for trying, can you? Though the net result is comedic, we saw and heard it. That's pretty cool. The Bill of Rights: Gotta love 'em. Keep them safe.

Thanks, bardic, for the post.
posted by sluglicker at 2:59 PM on May 4, 2006

You guys don't get it. A majority of Americans like the fact that he lies to them.
posted by hoverboards don't work on water at 3:07 PM on May 4, 2006

What happened off camera, were they about to throw him out when Rummy said "Let him stay one second" ????
posted by afx114 at 3:14 PM on May 4, 2006

BTW, CNN's story headline is "Hecklers interrupt Rumsfeld speech." Apparently asking a legitimate question = heckling.
posted by afx114 at 3:24 PM on May 4, 2006

"i'm not in the intelligence business"

we know, rummy, we know
posted by pyramid termite at 3:26 PM on May 4, 2006

i love the logic that since al qaeda was operating in Iraq, that means they have 'credible ties to Iraq'. I suppose it escapes them that al qaeda was operating here in the US.... which would also mean.........
posted by Tryptophan-5ht at 3:29 PM on May 4, 2006

i used to be under the impression that some mefites worked in the MSM. but the courage and intelligence i've seen here -- from all parts of the political spectrum -- far outstrips anything i've ever seen in the american press.

when i look at the MSM (and sometimes america in general) i want to utter the line samuel jackson gives to deniro in jackie brown: "what happened to you? your ass used to be beautiful!"

i mean, seriously: everytime i think they've reached a new low in sycophancy and weakness, they outdo themselves. they've gone beyond the whole "president, critics differ on views of the moon" joke people used to make about them to...i don't even know where they are.
posted by lord_wolf at 3:33 PM on May 4, 2006

Secretary Rumsfeld has a history of problems with the meaning of "know."

The Unknown
by Donald Rumsfeld

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don’t know
We don’t know.

Blast from the past: Rumsfeld caught lying on Face the Nation in March 2004:

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, you're the--you and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase "immediate threat." I didn't. The president didn't. And it's become kind of folklore that that's--that's what's happened. The president went...

SCHIEFFER: You're saying that nobody in the administration said that.

Sec. RUMSFELD: I--I can't speak for nobody--everybody in the administration and say nobody said that.

SCHIEFFER: Vice president didn't say that? The...

Sec. RUMSFELD: Not--if--if you have any citations, I'd like to see 'em.

Mr. FRIEDMAN: We have one here. It says "some have argued that the nu"--this is you speaking--"that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain."

I especially love his Gary Hart-style dare that they produce citations, and their immediately quoting him.

Isn't it a little silly to expect Rumsfeld to remember everything he's ever said perfectly? I mean, maybe he just forgot.

Maybe, if this were the first time he'd been called on it, but it's not. On September 10, 2003, he said, "I should have said, 'I believe we're in that area. Our intelligence tells us they're in that area,' and that was our best judgment."

Did they manage to pack all 33 percent of Bush's supporters into one room in Atlanta?

All of the backwash in one room?
posted by kirkaracha at 3:34 PM on May 4, 2006

"i'm not in the intelligence business"

we know, rummy, we know

Yeah, I caught that quote too. If I were running a campaign, I'd buy tv and radio ads and run that quote inter-cut with his stammering. He's usually not at a loss for words, and I can't remember the last time he looked so lost on stage.
posted by SweetJesus at 3:52 PM on May 4, 2006

what does he say in the dried up bit: "you're getting plenty of ????, sir?"
posted by 6am at 3:55 PM on May 4, 2006

Actually, he is in the intelligence business, so that's a lie, too. And business is booming.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:57 PM on May 4, 2006

"I'm not in the intelligence business."

You got that right, you lying sack of shit.
posted by fandango_matt at 4:00 PM on May 4, 2006

6am, I believe he was saying "attention," as in, "Dear Lordy Goodness, anyone who questions humble ol' me must be politically motivated and an obvious plant of the MSM, my lordy goodness gracious."

So he's accusing the guy of asking simple, brief questions in order to gain leverage with the media. Not that travelling around the country and making appearances before cherry-picked, supportive crowds is in any way motivated by PR.
posted by bardic at 4:03 PM on May 4, 2006

Wolf Blitzer did show the original quotes against Rummy's statements today, so someone other than John Stewart did.

(he didn't actually play video or audio, but he did read the original quotes and put them onscreen).

I was actually kind of surprised, since usually only the Daily Show does that sort of thing (sadly).
posted by wildcrdj at 4:21 PM on May 4, 2006

Metafilter: all of the backwash in one room.
posted by palancik at 4:24 PM on May 4, 2006

what does he say in the dried up bit: "you're getting plenty of ????, sir?"

"You’re getting plenty of play, sir."

BTW -- this was the lead piece on NBC Nightly News tonight. The main point of the coverage was that Rumsfeld is not only facing barbs from retired generals, but also the public is taking him, Bush, Cheney and others to task in more vociferous ways -- and the trend is likely to continue with a growing number of people confronting them in public forums.
posted by ericb at 4:29 PM on May 4, 2006

And the sleazy way he initially shifts the blame to Powell and Bush!

Its the Colbert effect!

Hehe, let's hope so
posted by beno at 4:29 PM on May 4, 2006

"I'm not in the intelligence business...." (Donald Rumsfeld, 5/5/06)

"The Office of Special Plans"

The Office of Special Plans, which existed from September, 2002, to June, 2003, was a Pentagon unit created by Donald Rumsfeld and led by Douglas Feith, dealing with intelligence on Iraq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Special_Plans

Liar, liar, liar, fucking liar.
posted by rougy at 4:32 PM on May 4, 2006

BTW, CNN's story headline is "Hecklers interrupt Rumsfeld speech." Apparently asking a legitimate question = heckling.

Journalists are the scum of the Earth.
posted by j-urb at 4:36 PM on May 4, 2006

Written to both ABC and CBS to call them on their bullshit.

ABC's headline is "Heckler Spoils White House Visit ". Awwww. That's just terrible. W.T.F. people.
posted by dreamsign at 4:41 PM on May 4, 2006

I'm so glad Rummy stuck to his guns in the face of that left wing nutjob.

Sure the guy had some facts. But he relied too much on his facts... and when the going gets tough Rummy just dug deep and grabbed himself some truthiness.

And the crowd was relieved of their distress. And Rummy's gut told him that as anyone who hasn't lived under a rock for the past several years knows bin Laden's boys were hiding out in Iraq under piles upon piles of chemical and biological weapons just waiting for a chance to strike when America let down her guard.

Not on Rummy's watch. Good job Sir!
posted by crowman at 4:49 PM on May 4, 2006

dreamsign writes "ABC's headline is 'Heckler Spoils White House Visit '. Awwww. That's just terrible. W.T.F. people."

That looks like it's from a few weeks ago, from when that heckler interrupted Hu's speech at the White House. I don't think it has anything to do with this Rumsfeld thing today, which was in Atlanta. I think ericb made an error in linking to that particular ABC story.
posted by mr_roboto at 5:00 PM on May 4, 2006

Who let that terrorist into Rumsfeld's press conference?

On The Situation Room (single most annoying show on TV) Wolf (AKA Leslie) Blitzer shilled a little for the neocon junta. He showed Rumsfeld's quotation (We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.) then tried to mitigate that with a quotation from Rumsfeld from a year later regarding the fact that Saddam must have moved the WMD (WMD shell game anyone?). It was all spin baby. Although he did play the whole clip of 'the heckler.'
posted by i_am_a_Jedi at 5:01 PM on May 4, 2006

anyone know where a transcript is?
posted by Smedleyman at 5:04 PM on May 4, 2006

Here's a transcript
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 5:09 PM on May 4, 2006

wouldn't it make more sense to have the fluffer preceed the penetrating question?
posted by pruner at 5:10 PM on May 4, 2006

I love how the new White House tactic for dealing with the truth is to go into chummy laugh-it-off mode to get the rest of the audience on your side without actually making a point.

And it's disturbing that the majority applaud him.
posted by fire&wings at 5:14 PM on May 4, 2006

bush's fans don't give a shit, you could show them a video of rumsfeld eating a baby alive, they don't give a shit. what the rest of America -- and the world -- thinks is clear, and it doesn't really count
posted by matteo at 5:15 PM on May 4, 2006

mr_roboto -- you are absolutley right. My bad.

The proper ABC link for today's incident is here.
posted by ericb at 5:18 PM on May 4, 2006

I remember this old Mefi thread on Colin Powell and how his UN speech was a blot on his record.
posted by Buck Eschaton at 5:23 PM on May 4, 2006

Colin Powell and how his UN speech was a blot on his record.

maybe he can white-wash his record... like he attempted to do with the record of the My Lai massacre
posted by pruner at 5:31 PM on May 4, 2006

When I look up "suck-up" in the dictionary, I expect to find a picture of the guy who followed Ray McGovern.
posted by telstar at 5:34 PM on May 4, 2006

I think the confusion comes from there being an actual heckler (some woman yelling shit) and this guy asking his questions.
posted by sharksandwich at 5:37 PM on May 4, 2006

Colin Powell felt bad about lying. Colin is not a good republican.
posted by zaelic at 5:54 PM on May 4, 2006

I fear the even George B. McLellan will go down in history more positively Donald Rumsfeld - the men who could not get the job done.
posted by caddis at 6:12 PM on May 4, 2006

Truly pathetic. What, it takes a stand-up audience member to ask Rummy the kind of question that members of any self-respecting press should have been grilling him on for years?

"We. Know. Where. They. Are."

You can't get any more definite than that. So, where the bloody hell *are* they, dickhead? It is a completely unambiguous statement, with no room for any kind of "oh, what I really meant was..." obfuscation.
posted by UbuRoivas at 7:01 PM on May 4, 2006

Those WMD locations were among the things he knew, which he didn't know at the time that he was wrong about knowing he knew.

Obviously.

So he was telling the truth this time. As he knew the truth to be at the time he was asked about, which was before he knew he hadn't known the truth then but only thought he did.

That's why he's in Intelligence, but can't remember that he is.

It's a matter of timing.
posted by hank at 7:19 PM on May 4, 2006

One day, historians will look back on this period of US history and say, "what the fuck were they thinking?"

The mood of the audience, the media spin about the "heckling", that SOB with the iced underwear and the fucking mess they've placed the US in, jeez, en empire collapsing ain't pretty.
posted by dbiedny at 7:56 PM on May 4, 2006

It's a matter of trolling.

All the officials of the BushCo administration have been picking apart at the very fabric of our nation, destroying it from within. They have done more damage than all other WH admins combined and at this point they're really enjoying pushing our buttons as much as they enjoy flaunting power and ruining our Constitution.

The problem is that unlike the trolls you find here, these ones have a cheer squad. This part of society either is completely delusional and complacent or acts like the goons from the SA forums (buzz buzz, boys) descending on a common foe.

Combine with that the fact that the free-thinkers and people who actually care about the Constitution are the targets of these trolls, but that they're taking it like they're a single nerdy freshman against the varsity football team, and you can see how we ever got in this predicament.
posted by mystyk at 8:03 PM on May 4, 2006

I have to wonder if when this sort of thing happens and the Bush mob go into nice-guy-laugh-it-off "let the guy speak" -WINK-WINK mode, it's akin to an astronaut with faith that the technology and the system (i.e., the strategery) won't fail and shred him into a million burning pieces falling back down to earth. It reminds me of the confrontation Bush had with Harry Taylor last month when he also said "let the guy speak" (WINK WINK to the audience). I mean how the hell can they be so certain the audience is going to be on their fucking side? I hope one of these days a room of people is going to have the courage to boo one of these horseshit spewing motherfuckers off the podium.
posted by Skygazer at 8:12 PM on May 4, 2006

Mainstream media will say, "we didn't play the clip because he wasn't funny..."
posted by nyxxxx at 8:44 PM on May 4, 2006

Who's the follow-up guy? He sounds like another Gannon / Guckert plant.
posted by tvjunkie at 9:05 PM on May 4, 2006

thanks for the correction, mr_roboto
posted by dreamsign at 9:28 PM on May 4, 2006

Perhaps this would be a good thread in which to post a link to "Donald Rumsfeld Orders Breakfast at Denny's" from The New Yorker?

"It’s just a rational way of dealing with expense, a very forward-looking, sensible way of dealing with breakfast in a very cost-conscious manner. That’s all."
posted by JMOZ at 9:45 PM on May 4, 2006

Rumsfeld lied, Bush lied, Powell, Rice lied, etc. etc.

My question: If all these people had no compunction about lying to the American people to mislead them/us into an immoral and illegal war, what possible reason / scruple stopped them from planting a few serious WMD's in Iraq (tanks of chemical weapons etc.) in order to support their casus belli?
posted by extrabox at 9:57 PM on May 4, 2006

They're so confident the audience will suppport them because the audiences are still cherry-picked, I gather... And the objective is showing images in mass media that make the average joe think: oh gee, there are lots of people who support these guys. All of their greatest strategies are circular like this. It's the same with feeding Judy Miller intelligence that gets printed on the front page of the NYT, and then going on the Sunday talk shows to provide outside confirmation (yet another source) of said intelligence.
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 10:00 PM on May 4, 2006

extrabox, I've read that they couldn't plant WMDs in Iraq because there are enough experts in the forensics of these weapons who could tell whether they were authentic Iraqi ones or not... I don't know enough about the subject to really say.
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 10:06 PM on May 4, 2006

Was anybody else moved by the voices in the background saying "Hey, this is America" when the speaker was almost removed?
posted by diocletian at 10:13 PM on May 4, 2006

While I enjoyed the spectacle, it also gave me a cold feeling because I had to wonder why no one in the press has asked this basic question in three years. Some democracy we have when we rely on our citizens and Steven Colbert to do the work of our press.
posted by squirrel at 11:48 PM on May 4, 2006

Here's a thought: much of this crew's ability to keep getting away with it is because we are a nation enthralled by television. I think that the press can get away without doing their jobs because no one really reads anymore--so many people are just fucking glued to their TVs every day, getting all of their information about the world from there, and maybe magazines like Time or Newsweek (which are just print versions of TV "journalism").

As long as the TV shows seem interesting and informative, most people won't even think to question what they're seeing. Newspapers can't be too contradictory to this presentation of reality, because they're terrified to lose the (dwindling) readers they do have--and to confront the truth would be extraordinarily contradictory to how reality has been presented through the much more pervasive and influential medium of television.

(2004: Newspaper circulation is in decline

2005: Newspaper Circulation Continues to Decline)

The media landscape is quicksand, all these giant corporations are trying hard to realign and reposition to keep up, and simply will not do anything to shake up the status quo--they need to keep the customers they have.

Also, as Neil Postman has written:

Television is our culture’s principal mode of knowing about itself. Therefore—and this is the critical point—how television stages the world becomes the model for how the world is properly to be staged. It is not merely that on the television screen entertainment is the metaphor for all discourse. It is that off screen the same metaphor prevails.

posted by LooseFilter at 12:44 AM on May 5, 2006

bush's fans don't give a shit, you could show them a video of rumsfeld eating a baby alive, they don't give a shit. what the rest of America -- and the world -- thinks is clear, and it doesn't really count

I agree with your frustration that the trend is so slow, but he is losing fans. People don't like admitting that they were wrong, but it is happening.
posted by aubilenon at 1:12 AM on May 5, 2006

posted by aubilenon I agree with your frustration that the trend is so slow, but he is losing fans. People don't like admitting that they were wrong, but it is happening.

No doubt we can expect a Terror Alert any day now.
posted by fandango_matt at 1:26 AM on May 5, 2006

Let him stay one second. Just a second..

Is this what happens when you pin someone with questioning, the heavies move in to take you out?
posted by Navek Rednam at 2:43 AM on May 5, 2006

This is so sad. I once believed that Bush et al were the good guys and told the truth about Iraq. But some time ago I realised that they were all lying. I would like America to be the leader of the free world; I would like to believe. Now I am just ashamed and worried. America should really be the home of the brave: now it is the refuge of the lying.
posted by vac2003 at 3:44 AM on May 5, 2006

No doubt we can expect a Terror Alert any day now.

NPR was reporting a non-specific warning about attacks on public transportation yesterday. They gave it about 15 seconds at the end of their news bulletin.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 4:13 AM on May 5, 2006

If all these people had no compunction about lying to the American people to mislead them/us into an immoral and illegal war, what possible reason / scruple stopped them from planting a few serious WMD's in Iraq (tanks of chemical weapons etc.) in order to support their casus belli?

because they don't give a damn what people think as long as their people are behind them ... as long as the true believers believe, the rest of us can go to hell
posted by pyramid termite at 4:39 AM on May 5, 2006

And further to my earlier question, on what grounds can we trust these people when they now assert that it now appears there were no WMD's found in Iraq?
posted by extrabox at 5:13 AM on May 5, 2006

I'll give it a try extrabox.

what possible reason / scruple stopped them from planting a few serious WMD's in Iraq (tanks of chemical weapons etc.) in order to support their casus belli?
posted by extrabox

Simple. No profit for their corporate friends. They don't care what others think.

on what grounds can we trust these people when they now assert that it now appears there were no WMD's found in Iraq?
posted by extrabox

None. Never ever trust these lying pondscum putzes.
posted by nofundy at 6:02 AM on May 5, 2006

This is where kids get the idea that it is okay to lie and then try to cover it up with another lie etc. and never get put on the carpet for it or have to accept responsibility for their actions. I am so sick of top guys giving the run around and getting away with it. Why is it that the news media don't jump on something like this? Is it possible because of the reprocussions that WOULD happen?
posted by grammajan11 at 6:06 AM on May 5, 2006

Some democracy we have when we rely on our citizens and Steven Colbert to do the work of our press.

Rather, some citizens ! Yet you should be ashamed of your hard pressing questions, it is not like you live in UK with communist broadcasters like the BBC and some liberal transmission like Hard Talk , which shows even hard pressing questioning can be tamed, but it's still better then 90 degrees bendover. BENDOVER ? Oh god I titillated, the FCC will castrate me !
posted by elpapacito at 6:08 AM on May 5, 2006

Some democracy we have when we rely on our citizens and Steven Colbert to do the work of our press.

Well, the news networks don't want to lose advertisers.
posted by NationalKato at 6:57 AM on May 5, 2006

Paula Zahn to McGovern: How much of an ax do you have to grind with Secretary Rumsfeld?

what
the
fuck
MSM?!
posted by lord_wolf at 8:06 AM on May 5, 2006

I agree with your frustration that the trend is so slow, but he is losing fans. People don't like admitting that they were wrong, but it is happening.

That's certainly a good thing, but I don't know how many are having "I was wrong all along!" revelations. I tend to hear things more like "Our boys are getting killed!" (what Iraqi civilians?) and "Katrina was the last straw." Which doesn't lend me a lot of hope for what will be tolerated of future administrations.
posted by dreamsign at 8:12 AM on May 5, 2006

This is where kids get the idea that it is okay to lie and then try to cover it up with another lie etc. and never get put on the carpet for it or have to accept responsibility for their actions. I am so sick of top guys giving the run around and getting away with it. Why is it that the news media don't jump on something like this? Is it possible because of the reprocussions that WOULD happen?

Speaking of that: when it was Clinton lying, we heard about it nonstop for 2 years, and saw pictures and video concerning 24/7 for that time as well. The media's only just starting to realize that their script for the past 5 years is now outdated and useless, and still are flailing. People have been speaking out and protesting at these events for years now, and only now are they beginning to be shown. And at the same time that this guy speaks and gets airtime, the Colbert thing was almost entirely ignored in favor of the administration's preferred clip--Bush with his double, shown over and over and over...
posted by amberglow at 8:34 AM on May 5, 2006

from Kos: ... When does the fact that people are opposed to this administration and are willing to say so loudly and publicly stop becoming the story? Is it too much to ask that the media actually start examining the content of that opposition, and reporting on that? The story is not Stephen Colbert. The story is not Ray McGovern. The story is the lies.
posted by amberglow at 9:41 AM on May 5, 2006

what the fuck MSM?!

On the Today show this morning, they showed a brief clip and said a guy accused Rumsfeld of lying and Rumsfeld said he didn't lie. They didn't say that McGovern was quoting Rumsfeld, or play the clip of Rumsfeld saying the words. Instead it was the same old he said/he said.

Here's Rumsfeld's original statement:

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: ...is it curious to you that given how much control U.S. and coalition forces now have in the country, they haven't found any weapons of mass destruction?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Not at all. If you think -- let me take that, both pieces -- the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

posted by kirkaracha at 9:42 AM on May 5, 2006

I found the applause and supportive laughter for Rumsfeld during this to be very disturbing. In a gang of thugs making noise for a fellow hoodlum kind of way. What a lame group of shitbags.
posted by Peter H at 10:35 AM on May 5, 2006

Thank you, overanxious ducksqueezer

*reads/fuels internal rage*
posted by Smedleyman at 12:02 PM on May 5, 2006

Non Sequitur - such a good call. Honestly, if we were given good lessons in logic in gradeschool 3/4s of the garbage we hear daily would be cut out.
But, after being back in the US after a long time abroad, it would almost seem Non Sequitor is an American philosphy. This, and all of the typical "what would the troops think," is so typical of the logical errors continually proponed by politicians and media alike.
It would at least speak more about the US public if we let ourselves be manipulated by aruments that hold their weight.
But then again:
Isn't it a little silly to expect Rumsfeld to remember everything he's ever said perfectly? - mouton
posted by pwedza at 12:46 PM on May 5, 2006

Some democracy we have when we rely on our citizens and Steven Colbert to do the work of our press.

Did you hear the one about the satirist and the president? Probably not
posted by dreamsign at 12:53 PM on May 5, 2006

McGovern is on Wolf Blitzer's show right now. Handling himself pretty well, basically stating that Rumsfeld has managed to politicize the Pentagon, the State Department, and the CIA. Evidence now = what the president wants to hear.
posted by bardic at 2:35 PM on May 5, 2006

Has anybody linked this yet? Thank You Ray McGovern!
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 4:05 PM on May 5, 2006

Time to smear the latest Bush critic
posted by homunculus at 8:27 PM on May 5, 2006