We finally have some clarification on Jon Kyl's statement that wasn't intended to be factual. I would be referring to his ridiculous statement about Planned Parenthood when he said that about 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does is abortions. In reality, about 3 percent of the Planned Parenthood agenda is abortions. See, when I do the math, that's a pretty big difference. But when that difference was pointed out to Jon Kyl, it was justified by the simple explanation of "that wasn't intended to be a factual statement". (And at first, I got really excited when I heard that because I thought that a politician was finally admitting that he spews crap on purpose. Yeah, but that wasn't what he meant. He was just a moron.) Well, now we have an explanation for the explanation! Don't get too excited, though. It's still lame. According to the political folks over there at Politico, when "Asked if he regretted the flap, Kyl said Thursday: "I misspoke when I said what I said on the floor – and I said so." And look, I don't
know if he said so or not. What I know is that he said 90 percent when it was 3 percent and then someone else said that it wasn't supposed to be the truth. What I also know is that the difference between 3 percent and 90 percent is a little bit more than just "misspeaking". It's kind of like the difference between one's ass and a hole in the ground. No word on whether or not Senator Kyl has been asked about either one of those. But then he was asked about the explanation that his statement was "...not intended to be a factual statement". His reply? "That was not me - that was my press person." Oh, for cryin' out loud.
know if he said so or not. What I know is that he said 90 percent when it was 3 percent and then someone else said that it wasn't supposed to be the truth. What I also know is that the difference between 3 percent and 90 percent is a little bit more than just "misspeaking". It's kind of like the difference between one's ass and a hole in the ground. No word on whether or not Senator Kyl has been asked about either one of those. But then he was asked about the explanation that his statement was "...not intended to be a factual statement". His reply? "That was not me - that was my press person." Oh, for cryin' out loud. I really wish that whoever asked him about that explanation had 
followed it up with "Is that person still your press person?" Because I don't know about you, but I know about me. And if it were me and if I had a press person who was idiotic enough to tell the press that when I speak, my statements are not intended to be factual?! Yeah, they'd be my ex-press person so fast that it would make their newly unemployed head spin. But I'm just going to guess that he's sticking with them. Probably because he was the one that told them to say that in the first place. I'm merely speculating here, of course. But at least it's me doing the speculating and not my press person.
followed it up with "Is that person still your press person?" Because I don't know about you, but I know about me. And if it were me and if I had a press person who was idiotic enough to tell the press that when I speak, my statements are not intended to be factual?! Yeah, they'd be my ex-press person so fast that it would make their newly unemployed head spin. But I'm just going to guess that he's sticking with them. Probably because he was the one that told them to say that in the first place. I'm merely speculating here, of course. But at least it's me doing the speculating and not my press person.
No comments:
Post a Comment