Friday, March 09, 2007

A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest

Jeff Goldstein on the cognitive dissonance of the Libby trial coverage:

Two commentators, two different sets of "facts."

Unfortunately for those interested in the truth, only one set of facts is based in reality. The other, sadly, is steeped in disappointment and the boundless ability of humans to self-justify, particularly when they have so heavily invested themselves in a particular point of view.
You'd expect this kind of behavior from the hard Left, but the partisan re-writing of history reaches all the way up to the dishonorable Senate majority leader:

In fact, the statement illustrates that [Harry] Reid either doesn't have an honest bone in his body or is so utterly incompetent that he failed to grasp two things: what went on in court and a 2004 bipartisan report by the Senate intelligence committee. It showed conclusively that it wasn't the Bush administration doing the manipulating in this case. It was Wilson.
One thing that's the Left has been accurate about is that the Bush White House was trying to discredit Joe Wilson; it's because he's a proven liar, a prevaricator who actively sought to undermine U.S. policy. But Scooter Libby is the only person - in all of Washington - who has been convicted. What a farce.

More - From Charles Krauthammer: "This is a case that never should have been brought, originating in the scandal that never was, in search of a crime -- violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act -- that even the prosecutor never alleged. That's the basis for a presidential pardon."

4 comments:

Felon Keller said...

Oh, those leftwing lefty leftists! Oh, their heavy investment in a particular outcome! Oh, their self-justifying cognitive dissonance!

Let's head over to an oasis of reason.

On Little Green Footballs, the same posters who'd been predicting a verdict of innocent are now just as confidently predicting the whole thing will be overturned on appeal.

Someone with a history degree noted sagely that "it's just the Democrats exacting payback for Alger Hiss."

Observing the GOP's recent run of good luck, another writes, "Oh well, the moonbats need something to celebrate. They've have had a rough go (of) it lately."

A third shares this strong analogy:
"They claimed he lied about who told him about a purple dog - there was no purple dog - didn't matter to the jury - they claim they caught him in a lie about WHO told him about the non-existant purple dog."

Poster #4 is dangerously close to needing rehab:
"BTW, I have my theories about what motivates Fitzgerald. Andrew Sullivan Syndrome. A 45 year old Catholic American of Irish ancestry man with decent looks and a good job, who has never married?"

Poor Judy Miller, Poster #5 has forgotten her already!:
"This is what you get for trying to respond politically to a NY Times smear job."

Another poster soberly takes the long view:
"This trial reminds me of the one that Pontius Pilate presided over."

Poster #7 thinks the Republicans should consider switching gears by bashing the media for a change:
"See what happens when you take the "high road" rather than respond to dem msm lies?"

Still, silver linings can be found, for those who know how to look:
"If Bagdad wasn't turning around I'd be more depressed."

The ninth poster has a voir dire plan:
"You can't have lefties as jurors against conservatives because they aren't objective."

This guy offers sorely-needed objectivity:
"Conservatives by nature attemept to play by the rules in fairness. But on the other side are those who lie and collude with those love to lie to advance their agenda."

This poster's been confused about language and its meaning, ever since Rumsfeld got Bush's pre-election vote of confidence:
"Is Fitz's comment that the investigation is "inactive" a veiled threat? Can it be fired up at any time for the next 100 years or beyond if the Dems want another hit job performed?"

We close with a poster who's clearly had a hard November 2006-March 2007:
"Conservatives don't have a chance and their continually softening spine is only speeding up the demise. We have never need a civil war so bad in this country."

It is sad to see Democrats so steeped in disappointment that they resort to re-writing history with "facts."

JorgXMcKie said...

So, let's see. The above post is filled with 'facts' about the Libby trial and the 'outing' of Plame?

Not so anyone could notice.

Care to address the actual point? Probably not, if you will be required to use those ugly 'fact' thingies.

Too bad the 'facts' on your side are in such short supply, huh?

Perhaps you could just go to another blog where this sort of stuff is cared about, like the DemocraticUnderground.

Eric said...

At least LGF didn't delete embarrassing posts/comments, unlike the sophisticates over at the Huffington Post.

Felon Keller said...

Tsk, tsk. JorgX seems to have skipped the original premise, which is about the disparate reactions of the two partisan sides:
Unfortunately for those interested in the truth, only one set of facts is based in reality. The other, sadly, is steeped in disappointment and the boundless ability of humans to self-justify, particularly when they have so heavily invested themselves in a particular point of view.
You'd expect this kind of behavior from the hard Left


Jeff Goldstein invites us to "compare, contrast, convulse," and so I did. Little Green Footballs, right over yonder on the lefthand menu of links, demonstrates the validity of his claim, in Goldstein's own words, "for those interested in the truth."

We're always hearing giddy babble about "moonbats" and "BDS" and "Dummocrats" and "echo chambers" from the rightwing bloggers & posters, who like to portray their side as the serious thinkers. A little perspective pretty well kneecaps that self-gratifying fantasy. Do you doubt for a moment that the same caliber of quotes couldn't be pulled off most of the other links' message boards? That's your audience, gentlemen... embrace your base.