paull wrote:Fight about it all you want, but the fact remains this would be, if true, one of the least stupid Murtha quotes.
See, this is a huge reason why political discourse in this country is in the crapper.
A paper
falsely misquoted Murtha, attributing a (fairly damning) statement to him. It turns out they screwed up,
THEY ADMITTED THEIR MISTAKE, and yet you
STILL have the gall to say "this would be,
if true, one of the least stupid Murtha quotes."
For Chrissakes, IT'S NOT TRUE. Get that through your head. HE DID NOT SAY THAT. He was quoting a f*cking poll.
If you want to make harsh statements about Murtha, FINE. If you want to call him names and what have you, FINE. But at the VERY LEAST, have the integrity to base your arguments on factual information.
Something tells me that idiots will continue to hold this "comment" from Murtha against him regardless of the fact that it is not attributable to him. Unbelieveable.
Lets just switch the people involved here for a second. Here's an example:
Quote:A paper quotes Bush as saying "I love to suck donkey d*cks." People who are against Bush JUMP at this statement. "Look at that! I told you the guy was nuts! He loves to suck donkey d*cks!" Then, a few days later, the newspaper publicly admits they were wrong. Bush was reading a line from an article he had. He was quoting what it said during a speech. That comment was not his own.
How would you feel if, after the newspaper PUBLICLY ADMITTED it was THEIR FAULT that such a quote was attributable to Bush, people on the left continued to say "Well, that comment,
if true, would be one of the least stupid things Bush has said."? You would be pissed. As you should be. So don't pull that same sh*t here.