Reliability and unreliability in the arguments

Toulmin states that consistency and coherence are prerequisites for a rational assessment of an argument and conclusion (p. 172). After I read this sentence and the post on the blog, I remember Kaddafi’s two different statements about his ruling. In one of them (last week) he compared himself with Queen Elizabeth and in a way said “Why are you criticizing me for ruling more than forty years, Queen Elizabeth has ruled more than me”. And this week (yesterday) he made another announcement saying that “All of the powers are in Libyan citizens’ hands and they decide who are going to govern them”. (Zaman Newspaper and Today’s zaman newspaper). These two statements contradict with each other and make each other unreliable!!! In one of them he resembles his ruling to a monarchy and then he talks about democracy. I agree with Toulmin that the statements in an argument should support each other to make the conclusion/assessment reliable. I might not pay as much attention to this claim in the book if I did not read these two conflicting sentences of Kaddafi and get really mad, I think this also a good sample for selective perception.