It's official: Shailagh Murray is indeed the devil

OK, WaPo resident neocon shill Shailagh Murray just got done with her "chat," wherein she not only called out Kos by name, negatively, but basically repeated the same prefabricated talking point over and over: Next week will be a disaster for "anti-war people," as she calls them/us, and she strongly suspects there will be "a whole new set of calculations" on the table.

Here she is in all her Satanic majesty here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

This chat, perhaps even more than the canned propaganda from the various neocon "institutes," is proof positive to me that the whole surge/escalation kabuki dance was carefully scripted from the beginning. If you read the she-devil's responses closely, you see she has already written the narrative she intends to use in covering The Petraeus Show next week, i.e., "a whole new set of calculations" for the "antiwar people."

The only thing that disgusts me more than this is the fact that the Dems obviously have a copy of the same prewritten script.

•  tips, etc.

  by Jim J on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 09:18:01 AM PDT

  •  An outright revolution is looking better

    all the time.

    She really takes the cake, doesn't she.

    Geez...

    by xysea on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 09:20:38 AM PDT

•  2 followups..

  The second questions that buried her asinine replies about Hsu & Iraq were lovely.

  Depressing that the readers are so much better at asking questions than the reporters.

  by Downpuppy on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 09:32:05 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    and she noticeably enjoys taunting her readers, especially on the left.

    by Jim J on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 09:35:59 AM PDT

•  What a bunch of trash

  and here's the perfect example of why journalism it ain't

  Anonymous:"The difference between the Norman Hsu story and the South Carolina cocaine bust is that the former resurrects some of the most serious questions that dogged Clinton I, the way they raise money."

  Did you forget to mention not one of those "serious questions" ever produced evidence of wrong doing on the part of the Clintons? An oversight, I'm sure. I suppose that ought to raise the question of why did those baseless charges "dog" them then, and apparently influence your reporting now.

  Shailagh Murray: I think if you do word association with "Lincoln Bedroom," few people will answer, "Mary Todd."

  Rather than deal with truth, it's the perception that is more important to uphold. This is what traditional media has become. Simple storytellers, with no regard for the truth.

  Liars, paid to tell yarns. When they deviate from the script and actually tell the truth, they are put behind firewalls, relegated to the far reaches of no where and buried on the outskirts of talk radio.

  Truth is not a valuable commodity to these hacks. Only reinforcing the lies and distortions earns you a big fat paycheck.  

  by shpilk on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 09:43:26 AM PDT

  •  exactly

    she was just taunting with that Lincoln Bedroom reply. She knew it was bullshit; the readers know it's bullshit; but she said it anyway because she could.

    by Jim J on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 09:52:15 AM PDT

  •  her other tapdance

    was this:

    Shailagh Murray: Yes, we are all in awe of Karen. Such a fine journalist.

    As to the Democrats and this war debate, I expect we are entering the murkiest phase yet. Yes, the Democrats are scaling back their ambitions. But the dynamic in Iraq has changed since the spring, and it is so hard to score these issues in the black and white way that many people would like. I expect that many of you in the anti-war community will be very disappointed a month from now

    followed up later by:

    How has Iraq changed?: You write "the dynamic in Iraq has changed since the spring." According to the reporting in your newspaper, the only dynamic that has changed is the political one in Washington. What's actually changed in Iraq? Is the civil war over? Is the government functioning? What?

    Shailagh Murray: Well, this is the problem. The tribal dynamic, for instance, is something new that I think a lot of people didn't anticipate. It wasn't part of the model, but it may be a promising development that could lead to more stability from the ground up. I'm not arguing anything here! Just conveying what I'm hearing from politicians, which is that the pieces have moved around on the chess board. I would bet a surprising number lawmakers study these reports closely and listen to the testimony. I don't think many members of Congress think there are many sure answers at this point.

    Shameless.

    by Downpuppy on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 10:01:16 AM PDT