Drudge Might Have Been Right
If this is accurate, will I have to issue an apology for my apology now?
I only ask because I just stumbled across an account from an AFP journalist at the John McCain press conference in Baghdad, confirming that a reporter was giggling during the press conference:Considering how this same article describes how the "slightly incredulous" journalists who covered the press conference "openly scoffed afterwards," it doesn't seem that far-fetched that someone in the press corps might have taken the opportunity to slip in a mocking comment in a stage whisper, just loud enough for fellow journalists to hear it, but not loud enough to be picked up by microphones directed at McCain. If the press conference official that leaked to Drudge was standing behind the last row of reporters as I've seen them do in the past, he might have been in a position to hear someone quietly mocking McCain's comments, even if those comments were perhaps meant from private consumption. If Raw Story is correct, Michael Ware happened to be sitting in the back row at that press conference, just where this AFP reporter places the giggler. Let the games begin, again. Update: Nope, Drudge is still wrong. The giggling reporter was not Ware, and the press conference was not interrupted, according to Raw Story.
"I studied warfare. I'm a student of history. If you control the capital city of a nation you have a significant advantage," countered McCain as one reporter giggled at the back.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:47 PM
Comments
Posted by: Bill Faith at April 03, 2007 02:28 PM (n7SaI)
You mean "Drudge might have exagerrated a non-story".
Your welcome for the correction.
Posted by: Mike at April 03, 2007 04:44 PM (Zge8p)
And you're welcome for a real correction, not just one that suits your personal preferences.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at April 03, 2007 05:07 PM (HcgFD)
Using the new fake but accurate standard, its pretty safe to say he wanted to do it, so therefore he did it.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at April 03, 2007 06:42 PM (22lCG)
Just asking.
You guys really don't need much evidence to believe whatever you want to believe. Then again, not too surprising -- you fell for the WMD story hook, line, and sinker.
Posted by: Pennypacker at April 03, 2007 07:20 PM (/erTa)
Of course we did. I mean all of that started the day Bush took office right? Nobody before Bush ever claimed that Hussein had WMD, right? LOL. When a leftists like you can admit to the truth, then we might take you seriously. But until then you are simply another Rosie O'Donnell - a person with absolutely no intellectual honesty, let alone cajones.
Posted by: Specter at April 03, 2007 08:18 PM (ybfXM)
My statement still stands. You have no evidence. All you have is speculation and hearsay.
Unless you have talked to a reporter that was at that conference and saw Ware "heckling" McCain, then you have something. If not thanks for playing.
Posted by: Mike at April 03, 2007 11:21 PM (Zge8p)
Posted by: ts at April 04, 2007 08:27 AM (ILyRW)
Actually, nobody before Bush used a phony claim of non-existent WMDs to start an illegal war of aggression.
YOU'RE welcome for the correction.
And, quite frankly, I have no problem being compared to Rosie O'Donnell, as she has both more intellectual honesty (not to mention brainpower) AND more COJONES (you're welcome for that correction, too) than you will ever dream of.
Posted by: David in NYC at April 04, 2007 01:34 PM (VVVSQ)
Posted by: scarshapedstar at April 04, 2007 02:17 PM (glUhi)
What if there was a second giggler on the Grassy Knoll? Somebody call Powerline!
Funny you mention that... it seems there may have been, but the AFP journalist who wrote the article, Jenni Matthew seems unlikely to admit who the person was.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at April 04, 2007 02:34 PM (9y6qg)
Posted by: Michael at April 04, 2007 02:51 PM (IBS+E)
Posted by: calling all toasters at April 04, 2007 03:00 PM (vdzoO)
Set aside that he took more than 100 soldiers, a few armored humvees, and a handful of helicopters away from whatever important business they may have had for his desperate photo-op. (there's some real support for our troops!)
Who cares if a reporter or two laughed at this clown? He is a joke. I hope he and Graham enjoy their bargain prayer rugs. That's all they're gonna get out of this ill-advised vacation.
Seriously, give this one up. Hey, I got something for you! Did you hear that Nancy Pelosi wore a head scarf while she was in Syria? She DID! What a... um... WOMAN-HATER!
(feel free to use that)
Posted by: Jersey Citizen at April 04, 2007 03:29 PM (fDnUd)
Posted by: klyde at April 04, 2007 06:39 PM (zo8Zw)
Actually, no president prior to Bush ever claimed that the WMD Saddam might have had constituted a threat to the U.S. requiring a massive ground invasion of Iraq.
And certainly nobody in their right mind claimed that Saddam had the capability to produce nuclear weapons, much less that "he has reconstituted nuclear weapons," as Cheney professed.
Perhaps if your arguments were supported by facts, Specter, you wouldn't need to resort ad hominem attacks.
Posted by: ryeland at April 04, 2007 06:41 PM (qlm9M)
I can't imagine a better time to be a liberal. Wait. How about 2008?
Posted by: James Christopher at April 04, 2007 07:23 PM (fk2zG)
Posted by: rev.paperboy at April 04, 2007 07:26 PM (5Ybxi)
But Lindsay Graham, now there's a story worth covering. He knows how to drive a hard bargin! 5 prayer rugs for $5.00! Talk about tough negotiations. Of course, bringing a 100 US soldiers and 5 helicopter gunships to the marketplace might seem like 'overkill', but you won't go home empty handed.
Truth be known, the merchant today said he gave him the rugs. Who could blame Lindsay for twisting this little story; I mean, taking 5 rugs for nothing from a merchant scratching a living in Baghdad would come across as a rather heartless gesture. Much better to say you paid for them, even if you didn't. Gotta love them Republican values.
Posted by: Innocent Bystander at April 04, 2007 07:48 PM (+JNxq)
Posted by: myself at April 04, 2007 09:00 PM (dUpQV)
But research would take work, which is too hard when one can just fill their head with neocon talkinghead nonsense.
As far as Liberals go, I'll stick with MY favorite president George: "It is my fervent hope that we have established a LIBERAL NATION".
George Washington
You can keep your Male Cheerleader, yeah?
Posted by: farang at April 04, 2007 09:10 PM (nsVec)
Posted by: flounder at April 04, 2007 09:13 PM (g1hge)
Posted by: yofish at April 04, 2007 10:16 PM (WLEJg)
Posted by: Arlington Acid at April 05, 2007 03:58 AM (F3Leu)
Bush, McCain and the rest of your heroes are lucky that people aren't rolling in the aisles shrieking with laughter at their every utterance. "If we aren't victorious in Iraq, the terrorists will follow us home"? Hysterical. Oh, you mean he's serious.
Posted by: Bob Hopeless at April 05, 2007 05:02 PM (OYaj1)
What is it with you wingnuts that you can't admit you're ever wrong? It's not as if you guys haven't got enough practice in being fallacious.
Posted by: jurassicpork at April 05, 2007 09:28 PM (C7rrY)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1604931.ece:
"The latest massacre of Iraqi children came as 21 Shia market workers were ambushed, bound and shot dead north of the capital. The victims came from the Baghdad market visited the previous day by John McCain, the US presidential candidate, who said that an American security plan in the capital was starting to show signs of progress."
Posted by: MedallionOfFerret at April 06, 2007 12:33 AM (E/BKJ)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0178 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0132 seconds, 35 records returned.
Page size 19 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.