• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Pot v. Kettle

Lost in all this debate about whether Biden's lie was minute, minuscule, or merely minor is - back to the OP - the fact that the criticism is coming from Karl Rove. We shouldn't even call them lies anymore - we should call them karlroves. What was Biden's greatest karlrove? Was it the drunk driving thing, or when he used that guy's speech and forgot to give credit? I think the drunk driving thing seems like a little white karlrove. Karl Rove, on the other hand, in the next breath after calling Biden a karlrover, actually went on to tell a karlrove about Biden:

Total karlrove. He was adapting parts of a Kinnock speech into his own speech, and giving credit to Kinnock for it, and not "recounting an episode in Kinnock's life as if it were in his own" and then one time he gave the speech without crediting Kinnock (which is, let's be fair, plagiarism, and kind of a karlrove, even if unintentional) and it blew up in his face.

Perhaps a list of Karl Rove's lies would be instructive right now.
 
Total karlrove. He was adapting parts of a Kinnock speech into his own speech, and giving credit to Kinnock for it, and not "recounting an episode in Kinnock's life as if it were in his own" and then one time he gave the speech without crediting Kinnock (which is, let's be fair, plagiarism, and kind of a karlrove, even if unintentional) and it blew up in his face.

No, this recreation of Biden's does not stand up to scrutiny as Slate discussed a few years ago:

At first Biden would credit Kinnock when he quoted him. But at some point he failed to offer the attribution. Biden maintained that he lapsed only once—at a debate at the Iowa State Fair, on Aug. 23, when cameras recorded it—but Maureen Dowd of the New York Times reported two incidents of nonattribution, and no one kept track exactly of every time Biden used the Kinnock bit. (Click here for examples of Biden's lifting.) What is certain is that Biden didn't simply borrow the sort of boilerplate that counts as common currency in political discourse—phrases like "fighting for working families." What he borrowed was Kinnock's life.

Biden lifted Kinnock's precise turns of phrase and his sequences of ideas—a degree of plagiarism that would qualify any student for failure, if not expulsion from school. But the even greater sin was to borrow biographical facts from Kinnock that, although true about Kinnock, didn't apply to Biden. Unlike Kinnock, Biden wasn't the first person in his family history to attend college, as he asserted; nor were his ancestors coal miners, as he claimed when he used Kinnock's words.
 
"Tail between legs" because I'm as lazy as you are? Okay...

You have to forgive Brainster... He obviously didn't yet recover from the election result.

Good times, where he would repeat every single lie on Obama that he could find, regardless of how obvious or infantile :)

A sad case...
 
Lost in all this debate about whether Biden's lie was minute, minuscule, or merely minor is - back to the OP - the fact that the criticism is coming from Karl Rove. We shouldn't even call them lies anymore - we should call them karlroves. What was Biden's greatest karlrove? Was it the drunk driving thing, or when he used that guy's speech and forgot to give credit? I think the drunk driving thing seems like a little white karlrove. Karl Rove, on the other hand, in the next breath after calling Biden a karlrover, actually went on to tell a karlrove about Biden:

Total karlrove. He was adapting parts of a Kinnock speech into his own speech, and giving credit to Kinnock for it, and not "recounting an episode in Kinnock's life as if it were in his own" and then one time he gave the speech without crediting Kinnock (which is, let's be fair, plagiarism, and kind of a karlrove, even if unintentional) and it blew up in his face.

:dl:

rofl..
 

Back
Top Bottom