Schiavo Memo
Power Line has the scoop on the Schiavo “talking points memo.” It turns out that the memo — which was billed as a memo created by and distributed to top GOP officials — was drafted by a staffer to a freshman senator. In a real boneheaded move, that senator (Mel Martinez) gave it to Tom Harkin.
Mike Allen, the reporter who disseminated so much misleading information about the memos, apparently believes he is off the hook. He e-mailed the AP story about the identity of the memo’s author to John Hinderaker, as if that story somehow vindicated him. As Hinderaker makes clear, it doesn’t. Allen is not off the hook.
And Mel Martinez seems to think he’s off the hook as well, because he accepted the resignation of the memo’s author. Mel, Mel, Mel. Staffers write stupid things now and then. That doesn’t bother us. What bothers us is when you distribute it to others.
Powerline’s much-vaunted “fake memo” is shown to be genuine, but Patterico thinks that it is Powerline that has the “scoop”? It is to laugh……
[Croche missing the point?? Who’da thunk it? — Pattterico]
m.croche (3a5464) — 4/7/2005 @ 10:01 amMartinez should fall on his sword and resign. We are better than that and need to set an example….even if Bobby “Sheets” Byrd and Teddy “The Swimmer” Kennedy won’t follow it.
Old Coot (72ce38) — 4/7/2005 @ 10:23 amWhat Power Line “much vaunted” was the fakeness of the story about the memo… that it was a set of “GOP talking points” distributed “only to Republican senators” by “the party leadership;” and far from being “genuine,” the AP story shows every one of these claims to be false, false, and false.
Monsieur Croche cannot understand this — or worse, just doesn’t want to admit it — which is the crux of the liberal inability to come to grips with reality: they just cannot let go of their political fantasies.
In this case, liberals simply could not fathom that anybody might act on principle in such a politically charged case. Why should they understand faith and principle, when the entire Democratic Party is nothing but a stitched-together patchwork quilt of competing special interests, each acting only for itself, and to hell with everyone else?
In the end, the Democrats were ludicrously forced to invoke the sacred nature of Federalism — which they had just spent the last several decades deriding, attacking, and undermining! Naturally, they continued their absurd caricature of Federalism even while touting it: they still, to this day, think it means the states can do anything they want, and the national government can never intervene.
This was the Democrats’ misunderstanding of Federalsim when they denounced it in the election of 2000; this is still their misunderstanding when they embrace in order to put a disabled woman to death.
This Darling little memo will definitely make it harder for GOP candidates in the 2006 campaign to use the thuggish votes of Democrats against saving Terri Schiavo’s life. Harder, but not impossible: Schiavo is not a political football, and nobody should have been writing or worrying about that while her life hung by a thread.
But now that the Democrats voted to cut that thread, it’s clearly legitimate for voters to ask why… why she had to die, why no court could ever revisit the basic facts of the case (decided by only one man — Florida state-court Judge George Greer), why she had to be put to death in such a horrific way. The fact that she lived for two weeks without a drop of water testifies to how strong she still was, and how much she still wanted to live.
And voters are very troubled by this. As the Zogby poll shows, when the actual facts of the case are presented to the American people, without the misleading and factually erroneous claims that discredited the Gallup and ABC polls, the people overwhelming opposed starving Terri Schiavo to death.
And no amount of liberal exploitation of a foolish memo by a now ex-aide to a freshman GOP senator is going to change the basic facts.
Dafydd
Dafydd (df2f54) — 4/7/2005 @ 11:52 amMel is a moron!
Rod Stanton (d1994c) — 4/7/2005 @ 12:43 pm“Power Line has the scoop on the Schiavo talking points memo. It turns out that the memo”
I tihnk its hilarious that you call his reporting “the scoop” when the story is that he was wrong.
[He’s wrong if he claimed that a Democrat authored the memo; I recall him simply raising the possibility. The real point is the media’s shameful misreporting of the circumstances. Perhaps I should have said “poop” instead of “scoop” . . .– P]
actus (ebc508) — 4/7/2005 @ 2:25 pmHey Dafyd and Patterico-please explain this bit of genius for me. From Powerlies fpp:
“HINDROCKET adds: A reader asks a good question: Where has Tom Harkin been for the last two and a half weeks? If he had come forward on March 19 or 20, there never would have been a “talking points memo” story, or at least not much of a story. The truth–that an obscure Republican staffer wrote a dumb memo that hardly anyone saw–would scarcely have created a ripple. The whole point of the story, as initially reported, was that the document was an official “GOP memo,” created by the party’s leadership and broadly circulated to the party’s Senators. If Harkin had told what he knew promptly, that story never would have been written, or would have been promptly spiked. So it seems likely that Harkin stayed quiet because he wanted the false account to circulate; indeed, he may have been the source of the misinformation promulgated by ABC and the Post. But then, why did Harkin come forward yesterday? Again, the most obvious answer does Harkin no credit: with speculation increasingly focusing on the Democrats as the likely source of the memo, it was in his party’s interest to come forward, even at the risk of exposing the falsity of the early reporting on the memo.”
My questions:
1. Where has Mel Martinez been for the last two and a half weeks?
2. True of false: If Martinez and/or Darling “had come forward on March 19 or 20, there never would have been a “talking points memo” story, or at least not much of a story.”
3. If Hindrocket’s assertion is correct, i.e. “it seems likely that Harkin stayed quiet because he wanted the false account to circulate” what motivation did Martinez and/or Darling have to stay quiet?
4. Please cite a link to story where Martinez claims he distributed the memo to no one besides Harkin.
Thanks for any reply.
creepy dude (0e79f1) — 4/7/2005 @ 3:16 pm” I recall him simply raising the possibility”
thats why he kept referring to it as “the fake memo.”
“The real point is the media’s shameful misreporting of the circumstances.”
Why? he just says that mike allen hasn’t given sources for his claims. Which seem like reasonable claims. Blogger of the wrong.
actus (ebc508) — 4/7/2005 @ 3:20 pmThe best part is the paper trail that Repubs have already left thinking they had cleared their tracks, e.g. Fred Barnes in The Weekly Standard:
“Yet the infamous memo that argued Republicans stood to gain politically by saving the life of Terri Schiavo was characterized by ABC News as consisting of “GOP Talking Points.” True, a few paragraphs were of Republican origin. They had been lifted, word for word, from a Martinez press release outlining the provisions of his legislative proposal, “The Incapacitated Person’s Legal Protection Act.” This was the inoffensive part of the memo.The offensive part–it didn’t come from Martinez–left the strong impression that Republicans are callous and cynical in their attempt to save Schiavo’s life, ill-motivated in the extreme.”
The conclusion can only be: Republicans were callous and cynical in their attempt to save Schiavo’s life, ill-motivated in the extreme.
[As long as by “Republicans” you mean “some staffer to a freshman Republican. Otherwise you too are getting taken (quite willingly I’m sure) by media spin. — Patterico]
Martin Morgan (0e79f1) — 4/7/2005 @ 4:52 pmSenators byrd brain and chapaquedic ted and off their rockers and out of their minds i think they have been in office too darn long and are just drunk with power
night heron (1b6edf) — 4/7/2005 @ 5:27 pmPatterico, perhaps you missed my point (quite willingly I’m sure). I didn’t express any personal opinion. I just quoted Fred Barnes to the effect that the memo “left a strong impression that Republicans are callous and cynical.”
[You didn’t express an opinion, eh? You merely quoted Barnes, eh?
Well, your comment is there. Readers can make up their own minds. But you might want to read it again. — Patterico]
Of course, Fred only said that because he either didn’t think Repubs wrote it or that they wouldn’t get caught. I’m sure he’ll change his tune quickly now. But the record is there to mock in perpetuity. This fun will never stop.
Mr. Darling wasn’t an obscure freshly graduated college age staffer btw. He’s a 39 year old senior counsel and a pretty connected guy with a history in republican circles.
So, for example, pre-Republican origin certification, Bill Bennett called whoever wrote the memo a “fraud or an idiot.”
Now that we know the author’s identity, Bill can further specify if Mr. Darling is a fraud or idiot, and we can track the fraud’s or idiot’s ascent through Republican circles. Hell, I bet Bill knows him personally.
To paraphrase Tom Delay, this memo really is a “gift from God”.
Martin Morgan (f064c6) — 4/7/2005 @ 6:48 pm” He’s a 39 year old senior counsel and a pretty connected guy with a history in republican circles.”
Former 2nd amendment (I think) lobbyist. This guy wasn’t new to DC.
actus (f9abe0) — 4/7/2005 @ 7:56 pmCreepy Dude, I’ll essay to answer your questions. Warning to all: I have always believed that the truth, the whole truth, will set you free.
My questions:
1. Where has Mel Martinez been for the last two and a half weeks?
Martinez foolishly handed Harkin a document that Martinez had not even looked at. We know this is true, because had Martinez looked at it, he wouldn’t have given it to Tom Harkin. Duh.
So because Martinez did something that stupid, he had no idea the memo came from his office. So he was as confused as everyone else.
2. True of false: If Martinez and/or Darling “had come forward on March 19 or 20, there never would have been a “talking points memo” story, or at least not much of a story.”
Absolutely true. Of course, Darling would first have had to tell Martinez about it, which he didn’t.
3. If Hindrocket’s assertion is correct, i.e. “it seems likely that Harkin stayed quiet because he wanted the false account to circulate” what motivation did Martinez and/or Darling have to stay quiet?
Martinez stayed quiet because he’s a dumbass. He had no idea of the true provenance of the memo.
Darling stayed quiet because he knew he’d done something egregiously stupid, and he hoped desperately that it would all blow over before he was forced to out himself. He knew it would result in the loss of his job. Duh again.
4. Please cite a link to story where Martinez claims he distributed the memo to no one besides Harkin.
No no, the burden of proof is on your side… specifically on the part of ABC and the Washington Post, who made the positive assertion that the memo was distributed to all Republicans or only Republicans.
You make-a the claim, you back-a the claim.
Thanks for any reply.
You’re welcome. Thanks for a quartet of puffballs.
Dafydd
Dafydd (df2f54) — 4/7/2005 @ 10:44 pmDon’t you think it is kind of strange that Senator Martinez didn’t fire his aide until there was a plitical firestorm? Doesn’t it make more sense to fire the guy when Martinez first read the memo if in fact Martinez really disagreed with the memo? No, I think that Martinez knew and agreed with the content of memo and that is why he had no problem giving it to Senator Harkin–perhaps as an effort to scare Harkin with the political fall out adverse to the democrats Martinez was sure would ensue.
john (26c947) — 4/7/2005 @ 10:45 pm“Powerlines much-vaunted fake memo is shown to be genuine, but Patterico thinks that it is Powerline that has the scoop”? It is to laugh
[Croche missing the point?? Whoda thunk it? Pattterico] ”
Disingenuous Patterico? A shocker.
Powerline ran around screaming “fake memo” to anybody who would listen. Patterico linked approvingly to his insinuendo (as Peter Cook and Dudley Moore used to call it). “Fake memo” became conventional wisdom on the right.
Pretty hot stuff, then, to see all those strident proclamations of “fake memo” so thoroughly debunked. Or so it would seem to me. Yet it seems to pass Patterico by. Curious that. Talk about “missing the point”.
[In your fantasy world, I tried to convince people that the memo was a 100 percent Democrat-penned fake. Then, when I was shown wrong, I tried to hide that fact.
In this reality, I warned people of the dangers of *assuming* that the memo was a Republican set of talking points, when the available evidence was just as consistent with its being a Democrat dirty trick. When it turned out to be the product of a staffer to a stupid Republican freshman senator, I posted that information as soon as I knew it, with a link to a post that detailed journalistic incompetence galore in discussing the memo’s significance.
Stick with your fantasies if it makes you happy, but keep them to yourself. — P]
m.croche (352e93) — 4/8/2005 @ 4:42 am“Martinez foolishly handed Harkin a document that Martinez had not even looked at. We know this is true, because had Martinez looked at it, he wouldnt have given it to Tom Harkin. Duh.”
Why would the point man on a piece of legislation hand someone the talking points on that legislation in order to sway that guy to support the legislation.
“No no, the burden of proof is on your side specifically on the part of ABC and the Washington Post, who made the positive assertion that the memo was distributed to all Republicans or only Republicans.”
I don’t think they said either all republicans or only republicans. I think they just said “republicans.”
[“Republican officials” or “party leaders” — neither of which describes bonehead freshman Mel Martinez. — Patterico]
actus (f9abe0) — 4/8/2005 @ 4:50 amThanks for your reply dafydd.
I see you would rather assume Republicans are stupid rather than (to quote Fred Barnes) callous and cynical.
Notwithstanding that they can be both at the same time, don’t worry about burden of proof.
The story will continue to develop and I’m quite sure that the current inane defense that the senior legal counsel drafted talking points but only gave them to Martinez who in turn did not read them or know their contents before accidentally distributing them to Harkin and only to Harkin will have a very short shelflife.
creepy dude (da46a2) — 4/8/2005 @ 6:42 amNow here’s what I’m talking about:
Today’s Allen story (that’s the one quoting Martinez aides that Darling “may” have distributed the memo to other offices-dafydd) contains this gem:
Edwin A. Buckham, former chief of staff to Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) said “Our staff loved Brian [Darling]… He is still going to have a bright future in this town.”
Yes-the man Bill Bennett sight unseen branded a fraud or an idiot has a bright future in Washington D.C.! Of course, it makes perfect sense when you consider the other fraud and idiots currently at the top there.
martin (da46a2) — 4/8/2005 @ 6:59 am“[“Republican officials or party leaders neither of which describes bonehead freshman Mel Martinez. Patterico]”
I think that when we have a republican senator sponsor of a bill distributing talking points on that bill he counts as a republican official
[Singular. — Patterico.]
actus (e137d7) — 4/8/2005 @ 11:40 amSo now the problem is that Mike Allen’s sources have said told him more names than Mike Allen has told us. And thats the problem with the story. from “Fake memo” to “reporter isn’t telling me everything his source did”. This certainly is a scoop. And without even needing to rely on the argument that the lead counsel for this sort of a high official might also be official.
I wonder why republicans aren’t stepping forward and claiming their role in this memo.
Or maybe the reporter is passing on what sources have said. Maybe the source didn’t identify everyone. And maybe the reporter doesn’t want to burn his source so some blogger has finally said something which was right.
actus (e137d7) — 4/8/2005 @ 2:01 pmThanks for your reply dafydd.
I see you would rather assume Republicans are stupid rather than (to quote Fred Barnes) callous and cynical.
Creepy Dude, I do not “assume” anything. I go where the evidence leads.
In this case, all the evidence points to Mel Martinez acting idiotically — not callously or cynically.
As noted in the comments of a later post, the fact that he handed the memo to Harkin is almost proof positive that he didn’t read it.
Dafydd
Dafydd (df2f54) — 4/9/2005 @ 1:12 pm