Fair Fight: Two Liberals vs. Hugh
Okay, okay. So it was a little lopsided but adding a third liberal wouldn’t have tipped it into the libs’ favor. That’s the impression I got in reading the transcript from Hugh’s appearance on Hardball last night. Check out this exchange:
REAGAN: Well Hugh and I agree, that we certainly have the right to secure our borders. We disagree about that fence. Somebody said that 10-foot fences make for a big market for 11-foot ladders. These are people who are desperate to feed their families, who are willing to brave the Sonoran desert and death by, you know, dehydration. Now a fence is not going to stop them. They‘ve got shovels, they‘ve got ladders, they‘re coming over.
HEWITT: Hey Ron, did you ever carry an 11-foot fence?
REAGAN: Eleven-foot ladder you mean?
HEWITT: Eleven-foot ladder? You ever carry one of those?
REAGAN: Yes, as a matter of fact, I was up on my roof just the other day.
HEWITT: Across the Sonoran desert?
REAGAN: You don‘t have to do it across the Sonoran desert. All you have to do is get to the border of the U.S.
HEWITT: Why does Israel build 400 miles of fence that effectively keeps out…
REAGAN: … That‘s a much, much smaller area.
HEWITT: It‘s 400 miles, Ron.
REAGAN: We‘re talking about thousand miles of border.
HEWITT: No, we‘re talking about 700 miles of easily accessible.
REAGAN: Seven hundred miles in a very remote country.
Talk about a total slapdown. Hugh makes Ron Jr. look foolish in that exchange. Hugh had logic the facts on his side in the fight. Reagan had….well, you decide if he had anything.
Then there’s this exchange:
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about the far more troubling question about Sy Hersh‘s piece in “The New Yorker,†somewhat parallel to the piece in—
I think it was in “The Washington Post†yesterday that we‘re developing a strike option for Iran, including the nuclear.
HEWITT: It was very interesting. Seymour Hersh gets it right about 50 percent of the time. I did not hear a single name. He could have completely fabricated that.
MATTHEWS: Why did he make it up?
HEWITT: Because it‘s a heck of a story. It sells a lot of magazines.
MATTHEWS: Sy Hersh is a credible reporter.
HEWITT: Half the time he gets it right. Half the time he goes on to stuff that will never see the light of day. And when you asked him, you pressed him, who is the name here? And he said, “Well, George W. Bush.†Give me one name and I‘ll believe it, Chris. And until I get one name in the Pentagon, I‘m not going to.
Hugh makes another liberal look foolish. Why? Because Matthews went by Hersh’s reputation instead of thinking that a story might actually not be true. Especially a story that’s that incredible.
Think about it this way: If you read something by Michael Isikoff or someone like that, where they claimed they knew that the Bush Administration was maliciously attempting to destroy a reporter’s career, wouldn’t you want to know who they were trying to destroy. Wouldn’t you want to know what proof they had to verify their claim? I wouldn’t take their word for it for a minute without that information.
That’s the difference between the real journalists that inhabit the Right Blogosphere and the farces that pretend to be mainstream journalists. When the two collide, it isn’t pretty.
Technorati Tags: Chris Matthews, Hugh Hewitt, Ron Reagan, Hardball
Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog
April 11th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
What a sorry thought that the USA doesn’t have the resources to build a 700 mile fence, while Israel can scrape up money to build a 400 mile one. The border security fence needs to be passed first, in a separate bill, because that is the only way to be clear about Bush not wanting to deport 11 million.
Some of these interviews of marchers are absolutely unbelievable - they are calling Bush a Nazi when he is on their side. The President wants to make them citizens by just paying just a fee, and those not passing the background checks will not be forcibly removed from the country.
April 11th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
To be more clear - One interview I heard the guy accused Bush of being racist because his plan deports all 11 million.
April 11th, 2006 at 7:36 pm
Hewitt uses the same response (it sells newspapers, i.e. financial windfall) to question the motives of Bush’s critics.
I’ve heard the same about the NYT reporter who broke the NSA story (he has a book coming out).
Ahemm.
Re: Cheney and Bush’s Iraq folly: Carlisle Group, Halliburton, KBR, Energy companies.
Any financial ties there?
Based on these ties why would ANYONE believe their excuses for taking this country to war?
April 11th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
Robert: Based on a spot on a dress and several unusable cigars, why would anyone believe Billy Bub started bombing Christians as a diversion in Bosnia.
I have my own opinion of whether Iraq 1 or 2 was justified. I also have an opinion about whether bombing innocent civilians to distract a restless public from a pecadillo is totally immoral or amoral. Course, I guess that would depend upon whether one believes that some things are always wrong or not. Situational ethics from a male slut just doesn’t do much for me.
April 12th, 2006 at 9:37 am
I read on Malkin’s blog that Clinton approved 7 seperate amnesties for illegals during his presidency - all were timed to give Mexican’s voting rights to sway elections toward democrats.
I remember very well when Reagan did his one time amnesty. It was splashed over all medias.
I don’t remember mention of Clinton’s 7 amnesties in the national press at all.
It would be interesting to investigate if there were mentions in the press and which media if any reported on Clinton’s series of amnesties.