Truth is Problematic vs. Rove: McClellan Sounds Like Left-Wing Blogger

[mindSET]

McClellan has raised many issues with his new book WHAT HAPPENED that has led to strong criticism from the Republicans and a lot of questions from the media. as i watch the video in pollclash (http://www.pollclash.com) im thinking Who's Credible of the two.. humm well im a democratic person but i must stay neutral to this.... Who's Right? Who's Credible?

What do you think?

[Cattraknoff]

People will say whatever furthers their own self-interests. In the case of Republicans (or any other political party/public figure) telling lies and otherwise distorting truth, they certainly aren't going to come out and admit that that was the case; far more likely that they'll deny everything and try to cover the truth further. Expect little of the truth from people so invested in the outcome of any given situation.

[Spartacus]

McClellan has raised many issues with his new book WHAT HAPPENED that has led to strong criticism from the Republicans and a lot of questions from the media. as i watch the video in pollclash (http://www.pollclash.com) im thinking Who's Credible of the two.. humm well im a democratic person but i must stay neutral to this.... Who's Right? Who's Credible?

What do you think?

Firstly , I am an outsider looking in being a Brit so my opinions cannot be based on experience ,although I do have a keen interest in events in the US as the decisions of the American people have far reaching effects.

I will be honest and say that I haven't read the book " What happened " but have just finished " Armed Madhouse " by Greg Palast ( a must read for American Democrats, imo ) and it is a damning indictment of the Republicans conduct in recent years.

After reading it people would see very little credibility in the statements/actions of the US Republican Party who have , fraudulently imo ,claimed the last two elections and will purge/spoil there way to another term if American democrats don't fight to hang on to their right to vote

As for the media , it is corporate owned so by definition is not a " free press."
Political debate within the US media is very sharply defined and lives in narrow parameters. It's a little bit different here but not radically so if that's any consolation. But then again in depends of your definition of radical I suppose. In short I wouldn't trust the mainstream media either.

Sorry if it comes across as doom and gloom but who is credible anywhere ? Our information systems are a hall of mirrors designed to confuse us all , that's why I like the web

[Cattraknoff]

The media seldom does actually lie, however. Generally it will give any and all pieces of information out of its proper context. It is a way of distorting and hiding truth without actually telling a lie (most of the time), thus maintaining some semblance of credibility.

The democrats are guilty of as much as republicans, frankly. If you want a solution, the only one available is a radical reform of almost all aspects of government. Both of the dominant parties favor corporatism, at the expense of the general public.

[Spartacus]

The media seldom does actually lie, however. Generally it will give any and all pieces of information out of its proper context. It is a way of distorting and hiding truth without actually telling a lie (most of the time), thus maintaining some semblance of credibility.

The democrats are guilty of as much as republicans, frankly. If you want a solution, the only one available is a radical reform of almost all aspects of government. Both of the dominant parties favor corporatism, at the expense of the general public.

I agree Cattraknoff , there are two factions of the same party ( the Corporate Party ) = Reps v Dems . It's the same in the UK. A radical reform is indeed much needed.

I agree too with your general view of the media but fail to see how it can retain any sense of credibility when it is known to be prone to " distorting and hiding the truth." And there is also the non reporting of the truth which invites no criticism at all and therefore no need to distort or hide

As I said about Greg Palasts book , what I read was quite shocking and there are instances of strange Democrat behaviour too , albeit in the echelons of power. The general public , and in particular the ones who vote or attempt to vote for Democrats , were the real losers. I think the people of the US have been robbed of their rights but I don't think that they should have to supply the getaway car. And that's what will happen if people lose faith in the voting system and accept a no vote citizenship. I think that's what the Republicans want to happen , in fact that is classic Fascism in action

[Cattraknoff]

I agree Cattraknoff , there are two factions of the same party ( the Corporate Party ) = Reps v Dems . It's the same in the UK. A radical reform is indeed much needed.

I agree too with your general view of the media but fail to see how it can retain any sense of credibility when it is known to be prone to " distorting and hiding the truth." And there is also the non reporting of the truth which invites no criticism at all and therefore no need to distort or hide

As I said about Greg Palasts book , what I read was quite shocking and there are instances of strange Democrat behaviour too , albeit in the echelons of power. The general public , and in particular the ones who vote or attempt to vote for Democrats , were the real losers. I think the people of the US have been robbed of their rights but I don't think that they should have to supply the getaway car. And that's what will happen if people lose faith in the voting system and accept a no vote citizenship. I think that's what the Republicans want to happen , in fact that is classic Fascism in action

I was referring to credibility in the eyes of the (generally-ignorant) masses, as opposed to those with little understanding of realpolitik.

Personally, I have little faith in our established democracy. It isn't so much a problem in the system itself (Aside from the blatant favoritism of corporations), but in the generally apathetic attitudes of the people. We are requiring of a revolution in our thought process itself; a revolution in each individual that together make up the larger wholes of nations, and humanity itself. Then and only then can a successful government "for and by" the people emerge, complete with social and economic justice.

[Coll]

Randyll Tarly for president '08.

The Kickass Party.

[Locke]

I agree Cattraknoff , there are two factions of the same party ( the Corporate Party ) = Reps v Dems . It's the same in the UK. A radical reform is indeed much needed.

I agree too with your general view of the media but fail to see how it can retain any sense of credibility when it is known to be prone to " distorting and hiding the truth." And there is also the non reporting of the truth which invites no criticism at all and therefore no need to distort or hide

As I said about Greg Palasts book , what I read was quite shocking and there are instances of strange Democrat behaviour too , albeit in the echelons of power. The general public , and in particular the ones who vote or attempt to vote for Democrats , were the real losers. I think the people of the US have been robbed of their rights but I don't think that they should have to supply the getaway car. And that's what will happen if people lose faith in the voting system and accept a no vote citizenship. I think that's what the Republicans want to happen , in fact that is classic Fascism in action

Despite the ills of the American democratic system, the only manner in which they will be remediated is citizenship within the democratic institution (undemocratic as it is).

[Gwendl]

I listened to some of the hearings this morning and I was particular fascinated by the committee member who was more interested in McClellan's publisher / editor than what the book had to say. I realize he was trying to play the hero for the die hard republicans who feel as though they will score a victory by discreditting the message. But I think such questioning will fall flat in the other 70% of the population. To try and turn any opposition to the Bush administration into a conspiracy from the democrats requires that the accuser have a high degree of credibility. After the last 7 years of all sorts of untruths and misrepresentations, they don't have that. Therefore, I think people will wind up listening more to the message that McClellan is putting forth (which in the current climate is quite believable) than those trying to discredit them.