Posted on 03/23/2005 2:16:52 PM PST by rightalien
ABC News and the Washington Post have described--but not actually produced--a memorandum relating to the Terri Schiavo case which they have described as "GOP talking points" that were "distributed only to Republican Senators." Many other news outlets have picked up on ABC's and the Post's reporting, such as this Houston Chronicle article, which relies in part on the memo to support a bitter attack on the Republican Party:
Most interesting is a talking-points memo from the Senate side of the Capitol that spells it right out in stark electoral terms: "the pro-life base will be excited" and "this is a great political issue, this is a tough issue for Democrats." We have written about the alleged "talking points memo" here, here, and here.
We have expressed skepticism about the authenticity of the "talking points" memo; the most recent developments have only served to heighten our skepticism.
First, an alert reader pointed out that the copy of the memo that was leaked to a left-wing web site does not quite match the "exact, full copy of the document" as quoted by ABC News. ABC News identified four errors in the document, each noted with a (sic). The first such error is in the very first word, a misspelling of Terri Schiavo's name. (Interestingly, ABC did not note as an error the fact that the memo got the number of the Senate bill wrong.) But in the scanned version of the memo itself, as now leaked to the web, three of the four typographical errors have been corrected. So, what is going on? Is the memo now being presented as authentic one that was fabricated or, more likely, cleaned up after the fact?
Second, our Washington sources tell us that a number of Republican Senators say they did not receive, and have never seen, the memo. This contradicts the implication that the memo is some kind of official Republican document that was circulated to all Republican Senators.
Third, the only clear evidence as to the origin of the memo is that it was circulated by Democratic staffers. Tom Maguire, author of Just One Minute, wrote to point out this story from yesterday's New York Times:
As tensions festered among Republicans, Democratic aides passed out an unsigned one-page memorandum that they said had been distributed to Senate Republicans. "This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue," the memorandum said. So the memo has been traced to a group of Democratic staffers. What evidence is there that its origins go back any farther? None, that we're aware of.
Finally, another reader pointed out the source of much of the suspicious memo: Most of its content comes, word for word, from the web site of the Traditional Values Coalition. See paragraphs four through eight of the memo, which are simply a reproduction, word for word (with a single exception), of points made by the Coalition. Those four paragraphs, however, are not the controversial ones. Whoever created the suspicious memo started with the substantive arguments made by the Coalition, and tacked on the political observations that have created the news story:
This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue.
This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats.
The memo has three possible origins. The first possibility is that it was created by a low-level Republican staffer. This seems possible, but highly unlikely. Only a very dim-witted staffer would 1) copy word for word from the Traditional Values site, 2) get the Senate bill number wrong, 3) make a number of silly errors, including misspelling Mrs. Schiavo's name as "Teri," and 4) mix comments about political advantage into a "talking points" memo. Moreover, the Post and ABC have tried to create the impression that the memo is an official, high-level Republican strategy document. It clearly is not that.
The second possibility is that the memo was created by a lobbying group, presumably the Traditional Values Coalition, since most of the content of the memo comes word for word from their web site. But the controversial political observations--"the pro-life base will be excited," etc.--are inappropriate for an organization like the Coalition. They sound as if they are written from the internal perspective of the Republican party ("this is a tough issue for Democrats").
The third possibility is that the memo is a Democratic dirty trick. At the moment, that looks most likely. It is easy to picture how the document could have been constructed. A Democratic staffer wants to put in some language that will sound authentic for a Republican memo. What does he do? He steals four paragraphs from the Coalition's web site. Then he adds the explosive political observations which are the whole point of the exercise--weirdly out of place in a "talking points" memo, but good politics for the Democrats.
Further, this could explain why the scanned version of the document is different from the one that ABC News originally obtained. The document was apparently corrected in three respects between the time it was given to ABC and when it was leaked to a left-wing web site. Who cleaned up the memo? Presumably the person or persons who created it. The site that put up the jpeg of the memo said that "a source on Capitol Hill...leaked" it to them. The source was presumably a Democratic staffer. If the document was a genuine Republican memo, would the Democrat who leaked it onto the web take the trouble to re-create it, correcting typos? No. The leaker would only correct errors if he himself was the source of the memo.
And finally: as the New York Times has reported, the only people who have actually been seen passing out the memo are Democratic aides.
The evidence we have so far is not conclusive, but it points in the direction of a dirty trick by the Democrats. The onus is certainly on Mike Allen of the Post and ABC News, if they actually have evidence that the memo is genuine, to tell us what that evidence is. In any event, however, the suggestion that this is some kind of high-level Republican strategy memo is ludicrous.
That won't stop the Democrats from trying to make political hay out of it, however. The same left-wing site that published the memo now says:
Hoping to determine who distributed talking points to GOP senators on how they could capitalize on the Schiavo tragedy, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) will send a letter to the Rules Committee today calling for an investigation. Reports suggest the points could have been circulated on the Senate floor, violating Senate Rules.... Are the Democrats moving to capitalize on their own hoax?
Holy @#%&!!!! Calling Buckhead...yooohooooooo.
Check this out- regardless of where ANYONE stands on Terri Schiavo...this is worth reading.
The Dems use talking points all the time. What's wrong with it?
This is the desperation of the Left. . .lying frauds; even 'memogate' is not enough to shame them into lying straight up. . .
I smell a rat. Desperate times for the desperate rats calling for desperate measures...
The World's Superpower and Champion of Human Rights around the globe is starving and dehydrating a disabled woman to death and underage children who bring her water are being handcuffed and arrested.
Does that sum it up? Did I miss anything?
If China decides to put a bullet in the brain of all their retarded school children tomorrow, what can we say or do?
Next time we want to whine because Libya or Egypt is on the United Nations human rights council we better learn to bite our lip.
There is your perspective from overseas.
I guess the Dems didn't learn their lesson with Rathergate.
Nothing wrong with Dem or Republican talking points...except when the Dems distribute a fake copy of Republican talking points trying to insinuate that the Republicans were doing this for political gain only. Despicable...the Dems learned nothing from Rathergate.
If they think this is some kind of Republican conspiracy, they'd better think again. This issue can't help the Republicans. Not only does it divide them, it will erode support for George W. Bush and negate the notion that Republicans are willing to actually do anything to facilitate their supposed "pro-life" position.
You obviously misunderstand me. I agree that what is being done is wrong. I am just wondering why anyone is concerned that the Republican are using talking points.
I understood you - - sorry I was being sarcastic
The memo is unsigned and blatantly inflamatory. I think it's a trick. If ABC and / or the Post want to contend otherwise, perhaps they would like to prove that with some evidence.
Talking points, as other powerline points pointed out in earlier postings, are about sharing with all the best arguments to make before the media and the public, and perhaps even the Senate. But who would make such talking points that say things like it will make our pro-life base happy etc.? What kind of persuasive talking point is that? That might be a strategy, but it is certainly not a talking point. The whole thing is a farce.
Have you seen this? Good analysis, I think.
Very intersting
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.