pudge's Journal: Response to my letter

Keith Hafner, apparently (unless I have the wrong Keith Hafner from Seattle?) a member of the Democrat party (not that there's anything wrong with that, just offering full disclosure) responded to my letter about substantiation with one of his own.

The best part is where he claims the letter provides substantiation, but doesn't actually say how it does so.

I am writing to him directly, asking him for the actual evidence he claims the letter provides; I don't anticipate an enlightened response.

In your response to my letter you claim the memo provides substantiation.

I want to know, since you bothered to write the letter saying this, why didn't you actually show exactly what evidence the memo provided? Maybe the editors cut that part out of your letter? If so, I offer you the opportunity to tell me directly what this evidence is.

I read the memo entirely, a few times, and I didn't see it. And I've never seen anyone say what it is. Most people in your position falsely state that just because the man was there, his claims are de facto substantiation, but that's silly. Substantiation would be some evidence that this is actually what the administration was doing -- such as a quote or memo from the administration to that effect -- and not merely a claim that could be nothing more than his own opinion (which is definitionally not "substantiation").

So, can you give me one detail from the memo -- just one -- that substantiates the claims it makes?

I look forward to your reply.

I wonder if he is gonna get mad that I e-mailed him directly. Heh. If so, he can complain to the 34th District Democrats.

Re:Trolling the Dems.

[pudge]

I look forward to seeing some intelligent discourse betwixt you two.

I don't. I just want to see if he actually can provide one shred of evidence, as he claims.

Washington

[jdavidb]

Did you ever consider that maybe you moved to the wrong state? ;) You could've come down to Texas!

Re:Washington

[robi2106]

Heck.... I'm a gun tote'n conservative like the rest, but I wouldn't want to move to Texas! There ain't no climate besides "hot and humid" and in my book those don't count as two different seasons. I need snow. I need mountains. Something that breaks up the boring skyline. I lived in Florida for 15 years so I know what hot, humid and flat are.

jason

Re:Washington

[jdavidb]

Can't argue with that. I hate the climate here, too.

We do have some really nice mountains in the west, and some really nice trees in the east. It isn't all flat.

Re:Washington

[robi2106]

mountains in the west

You and I might have different opinions of what is a mountain [altreephotography.net] and what is a foothill. In all fairness, I did just do some research about what mountains exist in Texas, and there are some that even I would call mountains, like the Guadalupe Mts. Those look pretty nice. Possibly a little too hot. I tend to like some nice cold mountains. [altreephotography.net]

jason

Re:Washington

[jdavidb]

The Guadalupe Mountains were the mountains to which I was referring.

They are pretty hot, but we've visited in spring and found them plenty cold at night, including snow. There's nothing more confusing than coming out of one's tent in the morning and looking at snow on a prickly pear cactus.

Re:Washington

[Red Warrior]

OTOH, maybe he came to the right state at the right time. Between the R's and the ambient libertarian leanings of most of this state, perhaps we can save it from itself.

Remember, when all was said and done, the R came within[1] a dozen dozen votes of the governor's mansion. Going INTO the race, I didn't expect him to come ANYWHERE near to what he eventually did.

A journey of a thousand miles and all that.

[1] I could carry on about the results of the election, but the judge ruled and Rossi conceded. Th

Re:Washington

[pudge]

Remember, when all was said and done, the R came within[1] a dozen dozen votes of the governor's mansion. Going INTO the race, I didn't expect him to come ANYWHERE near to what he eventually did.

I expected him to win by a small margin (which very well may have actually happened :-). Maybe because I was unburdened by the history of the state, and I could just see the tide rising behind him without all that on my mind.

substantiation

[coaxial]

The memo itself is substantiation. A conversation took place. One of the parties of the conversation wrote back saying, "We talked about this. I said this. He said this," and some how that's not evidence? That's absurd, especially given the fact that the memo reinforces what we already knew during the lead up to the war, and most damning of all, no one has denied the authenticity of the memo.

Come on. You're smarter than that.

Re:substantiation

[pudge]

The memo itself is substantiation.

Sigh. Not even close.

A conversation took place. One of the parties of the conversation wrote back saying, "We talked about this. I said this. He said this," and some how that's not evidence?

Show me where in the memo it attributes a statement, or even characterization, to a U.S. official.

As best we can tell, this is merely the "feeling" of the UK official.

This is wishful thinking on your part. You want it to be proof. But it is not.