Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on November 10, 2015, 04:38:32 PM
-
He's a regular Bill-O with the exaggerations and changes whenever he feels like. If he applies this same standard of honesty to all of the things he's written - and often repeated as FACT in interviews - it'll certainly take the word "dishonesty" to a new level.
Carson says the class was Perceptions 301. It was actually Psychology 10. (Carson now says that his ghostwriter might have made up a course name and number "just to give it more meat.")
Carson says the professor handed out the exam papers and picked them up. Bakal says it was a fake proctor.
Carson says there were 150 students in the retest. The writeup of the hoax the next day says "several" students showed up.
Bakal says the remaining students received a "small cash prize" at the end. But ten dollars was a fair sum at the time, about equivalent to $60 today.
Carson says the hoax happened during his junior year (1972). The Record hoax actually took place in 1970.
Carson says a photographer took his picture at the end. Bakal doesn't mention this.
Carson says the professor was a woman. That's unlikely since Yale had very few female instructors at the time, but it's possible. However, Bakal says "one of us" from the Record impersonated a proctor. Yale only began admitting women that year, and it's
pretty unlikely that the Record would have sent over a freshman woman to impersonate a proctor.
F
inally, and most importantly, Carson says the professor/proctor told him he was the most honest person in the course because he had stuck it out to the end. This is absolutely central to Carson's story. But that never happened. The Record proctor might have told him he was the most gullible person in the course, but that's about it.
-
I, for one, am glad about your recent turn of events and your new found fondness of honesty and your great disdain for lying. Since you've turned a new leaf, the next time a trayvon martin style incident happens, will you stick to telling the truth and not weave a tale of fiction that JRR Tolkien couldn't match. You easily told more lies about that incident, and many others that I'm not even going to bother mentioning , than anyone could count.
Secondly, you are so consumed with how Carson lies about violent altercations, yet you yourself lie about being smacked in the face by another man and your motives behind not reacting to it. You tell us that you spared his life, but in reality all you were concerned about was cleaning the piss stains out of your new skinny jeans. Be truthful and own up to your cowardice and maybe then you won't seem so hypocritical
Even more so, in typical carson fashion, you lie about how that situation would play out differently today when in reality you are just as scared as that long ago day that you pissed youself and were neutered by another man.
-
Carson is calling out Clinton... For Lying
-
Carson is calling out Clinton... For Lying
And you are calling out carson for lying. I see a pattern amongst liars...
-
And you are calling out carson for lying. I see a pattern amongst liars...
Ouch.
-
All the right wingers can stop crying
Carson said last night that he doesn't mind the media lying about him as long as they lie about the other side too
Since Faux News has been lying about every Dem (and even some Repubs) since their first day on the air and since Faux News has the highest ratings it seems like we're good on both sides
Now we just need to find some actual lies about Carson
So far I haven't see any other than his denials about his own words but then those are his lies and not the media
-
Ouch.
attacking me doesn't make carson honest suddenly.
-
All the right wingers can stop crying
Carson said last night that he doesn't mind the media lying about him as long as they lie about the other side too
Since Faux News has been lying about every Dem (and even some Repubs) since their first day on the air and since Faux News has the highest ratings it seems like we're good on both sides
Now we just need to find some actual lies about Carson
So far I haven't see any other than his denials about his own words but then those are his lies and not the media
Why do you only care about fox news lying? Do you deny that the liberal media outlets lie, or do you just not care?
I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time.
Why doesnt that bother you? For that matter, can you cite even one blatant lie that fox news has put out that closely resembles that scenario. I'm not talking about opinion pieces or political bias, I'm referring to literally editing information to a point where they in no way resemble a fact.
I honestly think that fox is the more honest of the media, and that is horrible considering they employ people like Sean hannity.
-
(http://www.rushimg.com/cimages//media/images/obamacarequotedoctorpix21/1437677-1-eng-GB/ObamacareQuoteDoctorPIX.jpg)
-
Why do you only care about fox news lying? Do you deny that the liberal media outlets lie, or do you just not care?
I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time.
Why doesnt that bother you? For that matter, can you cite even one blatant lie that fox news has put out that closely resembles that scenario. I'm not talking about opinion pieces or political bias, I'm referring to literally editing information to a point where they in no way resemble a fact.
I honestly think that fox is the more honest of the media, and that is horrible considering they employ people like Sean hannity.
weird
I would say the exact opposite
so called left wing media does occasionally do some questionable stuff but it's nothing compared to Faux News
-
weird
I would say the exact opposite
so called left wing media does occasionally do some questionable stuff but it's nothing compared to Faux News
If it is such a rare occurrence for the left, and such a frequent occurrence for fox, I challenge you to give one example that even attempts to come close to the George zimmerman phone call.
I gave an example, where as you just made a blanket statement with nothing to back it up. I would like one example of fox editing out certain parts of a conversation to make a man look like an aggressive racist in hot pursuit of someone because they were black. The 911 operator was edited out and zimmerman's comments were pieced together like a puzzle In a very deliberate fashion. It was no mistake, it was done with the intent to drum up the typical race hustlers and only an idiot can state otherwise.
Since fox always does worse, I'll await just one of your many examples
-
If it is such a rare occurrence for the left, and such a frequent occurrence for fox, I challenge you to give one example that even attempts to come close to the George zimmerman phone call.
I gave an example, where as you just made a blanket statement with nothing to back it up. I would like one example of fox editing out certain parts of a conversation to make a man look like an aggressive racist in hot pursuit of someone because they were black. The 911 operator was edited out and zimmerman's comments were pieced together like a puzzle In a very deliberate fashion. It was no mistake, it was done with the intent to drum up the typical race hustlers and only an idiot can state otherwise.
Since fox always does worse, I'll await just one of your many examples
you can start with the hundreds times that Fox has identified a Repubican going through a scandal as a Democrat
Regarding the Zimmerman phone call, NBC apologized, fired the guy and Zimmerman lost his lawsuit so I guess it wasn't all that bad
Fox never apologizes or fires anyone
This topic has been argued ad nauseam over the years on this board
I personally don't give a rats ass what you choose to believe and have no vested interest in convincing you otherwise
-
you can start with the hundreds times that Fox has identified a Repubican going through a scandal as a Democrat
Regarding the Zimmerman phone call, NBC apologized, fired the guy and Zimmerman lost his lawsuit so I guess it wasn't all that bad
Fox never apologizes or fires anyone
This topic has been argued ad nauseam over the years on this board
I personally don't give a rats ass what you choose to believe and have no vested interest in convincing you otherwise
Okay, got it. You don't feel that a news network completely editing a phone call for the sole purpose of making it to seem racist is that bad. You still didn't give any examples that rival that, or any examples at all for that matter. But then again, I didn't expect any.
-
Okay, got it. You don't feel that a news network completely editing a phone call for the sole purpose of making it to seem racist is that bad. You still didn't give any examples that rival that, or any examples at all for that matter. But then again, I didn't expect any.
I don't know why they did it and I don't care
They fired the guy and apolized
For thousands of example of Faux New go online and search the Daily Show archives
You have 187 posts so you're obviously not aware of how many times this same topic has been beaten to death on this board
-
I don't know why they did it and I don't care
They fired the guy and apolized
For thousands of example of Faux New go online and search the Daily Show archives
You have 187 posts so you're obviously not aware of how many times this same topic has been beaten to death on this board
It certainly has been beaten to death from a very slanted perspective. People like you that don't care or believe Hillary lied in spite of mounds of evidence, and people like you that think deliberately triggering a race riot is a trivial affair.
At least you pursue the important issues...
My point being that you only care if its a lie when it fits your biased liberal viewpoint. You freely call fox news out for lying but trivialize horrible lies reported from liberal news networks.
-
Okay, got it. You don't feel that a news network completely editing a phone call for the sole purpose of making it to seem racist is that bad. You still didn't give any examples that rival that, or any examples at all for that matter. But then again, I didn't expect any.
That was horrible. I have seen nothing on Fox that rivals what those folks did with that tape.
-
That was horrible. I have seen nothing on Fox that rivals what those folks did with that tape.
For him to being saying it's not that big of a deal, he must have not listened to it. Anyone with a lick of sense, even someone that names themselves after a debate strategy without actually being able to identify said strategy, should be able to recognize the severity of that phone call editing.
-
For him to being saying it's not that big of a deal, he must have not listened to it. Anyone with a lick of sense, even someone that names themselves after a debate strategy without actually being able to identify said strategy, should be able to recognize the severity of that phone call editing.
You are assuming too much. There is a reason why I call him the Village Idiot. lol
I think part of that kind of reaction is a result of folks getting get so caught up in an ideology or a narrative (or both) that it clouds their objectivity. Or they can just be plain old stupid.
-
You are assuming too much. There is a reason why I call him the Village Idiot. lol
I think part of that kind of reaction is a result of folks getting get so caught up in an ideology or a narrative (or both) that it clouds their objectivity. Or they can just be plain old stupid.
Anytime you attack me, we all realize you don't want to talk about those 8 "mis-truths" made by Carson.
Same tactic carson takes too, by the way. His stories contain a lot of bullshit, but those people following him can't admit OR deny it.
-
Anytime you attack me, we all realize you don't want to talk about those 8 "mis-truths" made by Carson.
Same tactic carson takes too, by the way. His stories contain a lot of bullshit, but those people following him can't admit OR deny it.
To the contrary, I actually like you calling Carson out and have agreed with you on most of your points. I hope you actually start telling the truth yourself as well. Hell, maybe if you don't continue to lie all the time, you won't get the shit slapped outta your puckered up asshole again.
My preference is only one of consistency. I would like you to exercise this kind of honesty on both sides of the aisle. There are plenty of lying politicians. Perhaps, you could be so passionate about the other liars as well.
-
For him to being saying it's not that big of a deal, he must have not listened to it. Anyone with a lick of sense, even someone that names themselves after a debate strategy without actually being able to identify said strategy, should be able to recognize the severity of that phone call editing.
you must have missed the part where they fired the guy and apologized (and of course got sued and won)
please post an example of Fox doing that
and then we can start having a serious discussion on this topic (which I'm happy to do)
-
you must have missed the part where they fired the guy and apologized (and of course got sued and won)
please post an example of Fox doing that
and then we can start having a serious discussion on this topic (which I'm happy to do)
They were forced to fire him when the real evidence came out via other outlets. They did not voluntarily fire him or release the real video. What choice did they have. They claimed it was an honest mistake and they didn't edit as such with any intent. Are you really stupid enough to believe that?
And while we are at it, you still haven't posted anything near as bad as that that Fox has done. In fact, you haven't posted any example at all, just vague references. You won't post anything done in that nature by fox, because it doesn't it exist.
-
He's a regular Bill-O with the exaggerations and changes whenever he feels like. If he applies this same standard of honesty to all of the things he's written - and often repeated as FACT in interviews - it'll certainly take the word "dishonesty" to a new level.
Carson says the class was Perceptions 301. It was actually Psychology 10. (Carson now says that his ghostwriter might have made up a course name and number "just to give it more meat.")
Carson says the professor handed out the exam papers and picked them up. Bakal says it was a fake proctor.
Carson says there were 150 students in the retest. The writeup of the hoax the next day says "several" students showed up.
Bakal says the remaining students received a "small cash prize" at the end. But ten dollars was a fair sum at the time, about equivalent to $60 today.
Carson says the hoax happened during his junior year (1972). The Record hoax actually took place in 1970.
Carson says a photographer took his picture at the end. Bakal doesn't mention this.
Carson says the professor was a woman. That's unlikely since Yale had very few female instructors at the time, but it's possible. However, Bakal says "one of us" from the Record impersonated a proctor. Yale only began admitting women that year, and it's
pretty unlikely that the Record would have sent over a freshman woman to impersonate a proctor.
F
inally, and most importantly, Carson says the professor/proctor told him he was the most honest person in the course because he had stuck it out to the end. This is absolutely central to Carson's story. But that never happened. The Record proctor might have told him he was the most gullible person in the course, but that's about it.
I noticed you didn't link to Mother Jones where the story came from. This is why you don't trust the political left and those that support them.
-
I noticed you didn't link to Mother Jones where the story came from. This is why you don't trust the political left and those that support them.
you attack the source. You ignore the 8 things carson "mis-told".
Attack the messenger. Cool. EVERYONE HERE kinda knows those 8 lies were intentionally told, and re-told, by Carson.
You have been asked "Did Carson lie - yes or no?"
Have you answered yet? ;)
-
you attack the source. You ignore the 8 things carson "mis-told".
Attack the messenger. Cool. EVERYONE HERE kinda knows those 8 lies were intentionally told, and re-told, by Carson.
You have been asked "Did Carson lie - yes or no?"
Have you answered yet? ;)
If the story is by Mother Jones I don't read past the headline because I already know it's bullshit.
-
If the story is by Mother Jones I don't read past the headline because I already know it's bullshit.
oh okay.
well, that kind of closed-minded thinking has led dems to win the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. Keep it going, President Hilary appreciates the way you refuse to leave the goldfish bowl known as FOX news.
Smart people watch both sides - know your enemy and all that. Plus, fox forgets to cover things that makes repubs look bad, or add a (D) next to a republican every time he molests a middle school soccer player.
-
They were forced to fire him when the real evidence came out via other outlets. They did not voluntarily fire him or release the real video. What choice did they have. They claimed it was an honest mistake and they didn't edit as such with any intent. Are you really stupid enough to believe that?
And while we are at it, you still haven't posted anything near as bad as that that Fox has done. In fact, you haven't posted any example at all, just vague references. You won't post anything done in that nature by fox, because it doesn't it exist.
right
they fired him and apologized
please provide an example from Faux News
-
right
they fired him and apologized
please provide an example from Faux News
You haven't given me a comparable example that merits firing.
-
Anytime you attack me, we all realize you don't want to talk about those 8 "mis-truths" made by Carson.
Same tactic carson takes too, by the way. His stories contain a lot of bullshit, but those people following him can't admit OR deny it.
Dude you cry as much as you lie on this board. Wasn't talking about you. Quit whining and put on your big boy pants.
-
You haven't given me a comparable example that merits firing.
I said he was fired an the network apologized
you've provided a solitary example of what appears to be the unauthorized actions of a single person. A person who was fired for his actions and for which the network apologized and were vindicatd in court.
Faux News engages in a top down, ongoing and comprehensive campaign of disinformation and they've done so for years.
I gave you the example of how virtually every time a Republican is caught in a scandal you see Faux News identify him/her as a Democrat
Have they ever apologized for this? Has anyone been fired.
Faux News lost their minds over Fergusson and Benghazi but then failed to report the actual facts and of course no one ever was fired or apologized. These are just two recent examples of systemic lying to the public. We could go back years and go over many many more but like I said before I don't give a rats ass what you choose to believe.
I'll leave you with this.
Why do you only care about fox news lying? Do you deny that the liberal media outlets lie, or do you just not care?
I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time.
Why doesnt that bother you? For that matter, can you cite even one blatant lie that fox news has put out that closely resembles that scenario. I'm not talking about opinion pieces or political bias, I'm referring to literally editing information to a point where they in no way resemble a fact.
I honestly think that fox is the more honest of the media, and that is horrible considering they employ people like Sean hannity.
again, the Zimmerman call was the actions of one man and not "the leftist media) and he was fired for his actions.
Let's compare that to an entire network "lying and omitting facts" over and over and over again, which apparently you've rarely seen at Faux News
-
I said he was fired an the network apologized
you've provided a solitary example of what appears to be the unauthorized actions of a single person. A person who was fired for his actions and for which the network apologized and were vindicatd in court.
Faux News engages in a top down, ongoing and comprehensive campaign of disinformation and they've done so for years.
I gave you the example of how virtually every time a Republican is caught in a scandal you see Faux News identify him/her as a Democrat
Have they ever apologized for this? Has anyone been fired.
Faux News lost their minds over Fergusson and Benghazi but then failed to report the actual facts and of course no one ever was fired or apologized. These are just two recent examples of systemic lying to the public. We could go back years and go over many many more but like I said before I don't give a rats ass what you choose to believe.
I'll leave you with this.
again, the Zimmerman call was the actions of one man and not "the leftist media) and he was fired for his actions.
Let's compare that to an entire network "lying and omitting facts" over and over and over again, which apparently you've rarely seen at Faux News
You aren't naive enough to think that was the work of one man. That was a fall guy. You are grasping at straws to insinuate otherwise.
In terms of your video, you didn't post anything that shows a lie. You posted a video of fox news personas claiming "hands up don't shoot" was a lie. Guess what, dumbass. It was a lie. We all.know that now.
Have you read the release by the department of justice on the mike brown shooting in its entirety or even snipets? I have.
I'm starting to.think you are pretty stupid. I've asked you multiple times to.show me evidence of a lie. And you can't seem to do it as readily available as they are supposed to be.
The best you can come up with is a.video of a fed up reaction from multiple fox personalities due to obama/holder having a knee jerk reaction to every race situation in this country.
Can you even tell me.what part of that video was a lie? The justice department found that blacks were stopped for speeding more, etc. In other words they created crimes at a higher rate than whites did in a black area. Gee, what are the odds.
It's unfortunate that you take obama/holders motives at face value.
-
You aren't naive enough to think that was the work of one man. That was a fall guy. You are grasping at straws to insinuate otherwise.
In terms of your video, you didn't post anything that shows a lie. You posted a video of fox news personas claiming "hands up don't shoot" was a lie. Guess what, dumbass. It was a lie. We all.know that now.
Have you read the release by the department of justice on the mike brown shooting in its entirety or even snipets? I have.
I'm starting to.think you are pretty stupid. I've asked you multiple times to.show me evidence of a lie. And you can't seem to do it as readily available as they are supposed to be.
The best you can come up with is a.video of a fed up reaction from multiple fox personalities due to obama/holder having a knee jerk reaction to every race situation in this country.
Can you even tell me.what part of that video was a lie? The justice department found that blacks were stopped for speeding more, etc. In other words they created crimes at a higher rate than whites did in a black area. Gee, what are the odds.
It's unfortunate that you take obama/holders motives at face value.
feel free to provide ANY proof that his editing was mandated from the top down
regarding the video I assume you didn't watch it (which does not surprise me at all) otherwise you would see all the evidence you need of both lying and omitting facts (you know the very thing you claim to have never or rarely ever seen)
Feel free to provide me example of Faux New apologizing or anyone being fired for their systematic daily lies
-
feel free to provide ANY proof that his editing was mandated from the top down
regarding the video I assume you didn't watch it (which does not surprise me at all) otherwise you would see all the evidence you need of both lying and omitting facts (you know the very thing you claim to have never or rarely ever seen)
Feel free to provide me example of Faux New apologizing or anyone being fired for their systematic daily lies
Well, I'm done making you look like a biased idiot. I can't imagine that you would not even question the network motive, and just believe it was 1 man. You aren't only stupid, you are dishonest.
Even though you don't deserve it ,I did watch the video in its entirety. I watched a liberal comedian ridicule fox news for wanting apologies from guilty parties for inciting a race riot. I'm sorry if that is where you get your news, but it doesn't shock me.
Your bias at this point is undeniable when you imply a lone crazy man edited that so severely. Go learn what your screen name means now.
-
Well, I'm done making you look like a biased idiot. I can't imagine that you would not even question the network motive, and just believe it was 1 man. You aren't only stupid, you are dishonest.
Even though you don't deserve it ,I did watch the video in its entirety. I watched a liberal comedian ridicule fox news for wanting apologies from guilty parties for inciting a race riot. I'm sorry if that is where you get your news, but it doesn't shock me.
Your bias at this point is undeniable when you imply a lone crazy man edited that so severely. Go learn what your screen name means now.
the only thing you've done you're prove you're a delusional ideologue (and also confirmed my prior statement that trying engage you seriously on this topic and I suspect any other topic is a waste time)
Congratulations on putting yourself in the loser/waste of time category in so few posts
That might be a new record for this board
-
the only thing you've done you're prove you're a delusional ideologue (and also confirmed my prior statement that trying engage you seriously on this topic and I suspect any other topic is a waste time)
Congratulations on putting yourself in the loser/waste of time category in so few posts
That might be a new record for this board
You literally never provided a single lie told by fox news. Believe me, I'm not naive enough to think they don't stretch the truth, but you couldn't provide 1. You provided a comical opinion piece.
And your are a liar or the most naive man on the planet to suggest msnbc had no role to play. I think you are a liar. You have stated you don't care over and over again when it comes to liberal misdeeds.
Only a complete schmuck would suggest that because something was won in court, that justice was accomplished. And that happens to be your only case for msnbc. There was a lack of evidence to incriminate them so the case was dismiised. It doesn't free them of guilt.
You need to stick to criticizing coach for his weak arguments and 1 sided political stance. Your reading comprehension isn't so great and your ability to lie with a straight face is even worse. You also need to change your screen name. It's an insult to any proper debate tactic that you would feel your tiny mind could represent it. Hell, you proved weeks ago you don't even know what it means. I hope you at least used Wikipedia to find out by now
-
You literally never provided a single lie told by fox news. Believe me, I'm not naive enough to think they don't stretch the truth, but you couldn't provide 1. You provided a comical opinion piece.
And your are a liar or the most naive man on the planet to suggest msnbc had no role to play. I think you are a liar. You have stated you don't care over and over again when it comes to liberal misdeeds.
Only a complete schmuck would suggest that because something was won in court, that justice was accomplished. And that happens to be your only case for msnbc. There was a lack of evidence to incriminate them so the case was dismiised. It doesn't free them of guilt.
You need to stick to criticizing coach for his weak arguments and 1 sided political stance. Your reading comprehension isn't so great and your ability to lie with a straight face is even worse. You also need to change your screen name. It's an insult to any proper debate tactic that you would feel your tiny mind could represent it. Hell, you proved weeks ago you don't even know what it means. I hope you at least used Wikipedia to find out by now
first thing I said were the many many times they indicated that a scandal ridden Republican was a Democrat
We've been over that VERY THING many times on this board
How about addressing that
Why have they never apologized
Why has no one ever been fired
-
first thing I said were the many many times they indicated that a scandal ridden Republican was a Democrat
We've been over that VERY THING many times on this board
How about addressing that
Why have they never apologized
Why has no one ever been fired
For the love of.god and sweet baby Jesus, provide a fucking example. A name, something. Not a vague reference. Provide the name . It's not that fucking hard.
Will someone please help this idiot. Not only is he oblivious to what his screen name means, he doesn't know what the word "example" means. He says that the lies are readily available but he still fails to provide the specifics.
Can someone please take over for and cite an example and save strawbrain from this train wreck. Anyone
-
FOX showing mccain 2000 footage in 2008 because his crowds were bigger in 2000. They "accidentally" went into the archives and inserted that footage.
FOX adding (D) to the name of disgraced republicans, and it happens a lot.
-
FOX showing mccain 2000 footage in 2008 because his crowds were bigger in 2000. They "accidentally" went into the archives and inserted that footage.
FOX adding (D) to the name of disgraced republicans, and it happens a lot.
Thank you for providing an example. That's all I asked for. That was easy wasn't it. It isn't as bad as butchering a phone call, but it was likely deliberate.
As far as the 2nd point, that isn't an example, it's vague. While I'm certain it probably happens, an example might help clarify if it was deliberate deception or incompetent journalism
-
Thank you for providing an example. That's all I asked for. That was easy wasn't it. It isn't as bad as butchering a phone call, but it was likely deliberate.
As far as the 2nd point, that isn't an example, it's vague. While I'm certain it probably happens, an example might help clarify if it was deliberate deception or incompetent journalism
I love watching both sides. FOX has a few tricks they use a lot.
"Some people are saying" = their way to introduce any attack or conspiracy theory without accounability.
"War on... " freaking anything. Anything. Outrage over anything.
"Race wars on the way?" STFU, people are too lazy for that and we all have guns. Grow up.
And lastly, they find an example of 1 idiot being stupid, and they give him a platform for 10 mllion viewers. THEY INVENT and ELEVATE BAD GUYS all the time. Nobody would have heard of these idiots, until fox plays them 24/7. We still see video clips of those 2 moron black panthers from 2008 that affected exactly nothing.
FOX anchors are usually beauty pageant winners, and everyone has kissed their ass, for their entire life, and they can feign outrage very easily. They also act dumber than they are. "What, I dont' even know what that means..." because many in their audience are angry, drunk, or just distracted because they're masturbating while watching.
MSNBC has their tricks too. They are VERY good at gotcha. If a republican said it 17 years ago, they have the video on hand. They're highly educated and very holier-than-thou, annoying as piss.
-
I love watching both sides. FOX has a few tricks they use a lot.
"Some people are saying" = their way to introduce any attack or conspiracy theory without accounability.
"War on... " freaking anything. Anything. Outrage over anything.
"Race wars on the way?" STFU, people are too lazy for that and we all have guns. Grow up.
And lastly, they find an example of 1 idiot being stupid, and they give him a platform for 10 mllion viewers. THEY INVENT and ELEVATE BAD GUYS all the time. Nobody would have heard of these idiots, until fox plays them 24/7. We still see video clips of those 2 moron black panthers from 2008 that affected exactly nothing.
FOX anchors are usually beauty pageant winners, and everyone has kissed their ass, for their entire life, and they can feign outrage very easily. They also act dumber than they are. "What, I dont' even know what that means..." because many in their audience are angry, drunk, or just distracted because they're masturbating while watching.
MSNBC has their tricks too. They are VERY good at gotcha. If a republican said it 17 years ago, they have the video on hand. They're highly educated and very holier-than-thou, annoying as piss.
I agree with you completely. That is my whole point here. Let's try and demand honesty from both sides, not just the one that we don't vote for.
-
Thank you for providing an example. That's all I asked for. That was easy wasn't it. It isn't as bad as butchering a phone call, but it was likely deliberate.
As far as the 2nd point, that isn't an example, it's vague. While I'm certain it probably happens, an example might help clarify if it was deliberate deception or incompetent journalism
I'll give you plenty of example but first tell me that you're actually unaware of Faux News well known history of lying
I assume you're an adult so just tell me that somehow you were never aware of the first thing I mentioned (and again this has been talked about MANY TIMES on this board) which I why I referenced it without providing any examples
tell me you're truly unaware of this
-
I'll give you plenty of example but first tell me that you're actually unaware of Faux News well known history of lying
I assume you're an adult so just tell me that somehow you were never aware of the first thing I mentioned (and again this has been talked about MANY TIMES on this board) which I why I referenced it without providing any examples
tell me you're truly unaware of this
All news media lie to some degree. I agreed with 240 about such a few posts above this one. However, I find it fascinating that you claim their lies are so rampant and greater so than the liberal media, yet it's taken you this long to cite an example. A 5 year old on an ipad could have found multiple examples in this time. I suspect 240 found multiple ones of the top of his head.
I'm even more in awe of the fact that you only care when Fox News lies. You care less about the lies committed by liberal media. You admit to not caring when they do lie, and more than often evade the lie or try to minimize it, as you did multiple times with the Zimmerman phone call example.
No honest person could claim they believed msnbc had clean hands in that. Then again, I don't take you to be an honest person at all.
-
I agree with you completely. That is my whole point here. Let's try and demand honesty from both sides, not just the one that we don't vote for.
thanks. we have a lot of longtime getbiggers that pride themselves on having never watched MSNBC, but they claim 24/7 to know how bad it is, and how unbiased FOX is.
How can you KNOW fox is unbiased if you ONLY watch it? Particularly when half the time you're watching it, they're TELLING YOU over and over how unbiased they are, and how crooked the other channels are. Imagine only eating vanilla ice cream, and telling everyone how superior it is. ANd, on the vanilla ice cream box, you read paragraphs about how strawberry ice cream causes herpes. Then you go on the ice cream forums and shit all over a flavor you've never tried.
-
I suspect 240 found multiple ones of the top of his head.
i'll be honest, i love the media - both sides. I'm fascinated by it. these giant opinion-influencing machines that teaches their subscribers to mistrust and hate on the competitors. and the more stupid the viewer, the louder and more passionate they are about shitting all over networks they've never even watched.
-
All news media lie to some degree. I agreed with 240 about such a few posts above this one. However, I find it fascinating that you claim their lies are so rampant and greater so than the liberal media, yet it's taken you this long to cite an example. A 5 year old on an ipad could have found multiple examples in this time. I suspect 240 found multiple ones of the top of his head.
I'm even more in awe of the fact that you only care when Fox News lies. You care less about the lies committed by liberal media. You admit to not caring when they do lie, and more than often evade the lie or try to minimize it, as you did multiple times with the Zimmerman phone call example.
No honest person could claim they believed msnbc had clean hands in that. Then again, I don't take you to be an honest person at all.
I'm a bit busy during the day and the things I mentioned are well know and have been talked about many times on this site
answer my question and I'll give you all the example you want and then of course you'll need to provide the same amount of more to support your premise
"I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media "
So you believe that Fox News (and the right wing media) lies less than the "left wing media"
yes....and then we can move on to examples (many many many examples)
I'm ready to go but keep in mind I've said from the beginning that I don't give a rats ass what you believe and I get nothing out of investing time arguing that you're wrong but I've got about a half hour so let's go
-
I'm a bit busy during the day and the things I mentioned are well know and have been talked about many times on this site
answer my question and I'll give you all the example you want and then of course you'll need to provide the same amount of more to support your premise
"I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media "
So you believe that Fox News (and the right wing media) lies less than the "left wing media"
yes....and then we can move on to examples (many many many examples)
I'm ready to go but keep in mind I've said from the beginning that I don't give a rats ass what you believe and I get nothing out of investing time arguing that you're wrong but I've got about a half hour so let's go
If you can find me a lie committed in as deliberate fashion as that Zimmerman phone call, I'll agree with whatever you say. Then again, you won't even agree msnbc possibly played a role in it, nor do you care if they do. That is an atrocity to journalism and someone should be in jail for that. Period.
You weren't too busy to link a comedic video that showed zero lies, rather it showed an opinion of a liberal comedian. I can't imagine that took any less time than the infinite lies you speak of...
-
If you can find me a lie committed in as deliberate fashion as that Zimmerman phone call, I'll agree with whatever you say. Then again, you won't even agree msnbc possibly played a role in it, nor do you care if they do. That is an atrocity to journalism and someone should be in jail for that. Period.
that phone call is one example of one person (as far as we know - show proof if not) of one lie and unlike Faux News, NBC fired the liar, apologized
so you've got one
lets get started
tell me you're unaware of Fox News DAILY LIES FOR 20 YEARS and I'll start
-
that phone is one example of one person (as far as we know - show proof if not) of one lie and unlike Faux News, NBC fired the liar, apologized
so you've got one
lets get started
tell me you're unaware of Fox News DAILY LIES FOR 20 YEARS and I'll start
They fired him after other news agencies made them look like idiots and they needed a fall guy. An apology is worth nothing if the act committed was deliberate. If i screwed your wife knowing she was married, and apologized after the fact, its hardly sincere or worth a shit.
Feel free to start. Judging by you comedic piece that depicted no lie, I'm not real confident you can tell the difference between a lie, opinion, etc
-
They fired him after other news agencies made them look like idiots and they needed a fall guy. An apology is worth nothing if the act committed was deliberate. If i screwed your wife knowing she was married, and apologized after the fact, its hardly sincere or worth a shit.
Feel free to start. Judging by you comedic piece that depicted no lie, I'm not real confident you can tell the difference between a lie, opinion, etc
again the premise who lies the most
your personal opinions about specific lies are irrelevant by your own premise ("I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media")
I'd say "death panels" but I'm sure you'll pretend you're unaware that LIE was probably said thousands of times on Faux News if not hundreds of thousands of times on right wing media so I we can just do them one for one
Lie #1
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2013/nov/13/sean-hannity/hannity-says-government-predicted-massive-loss-hea/
-
again the premise who lies the most
your personal opinions about specific lies are irrelevant by your own premise ("I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media")
I'd say "death panels" but I'm sure you'll pretend you're unaware that LIE was probably said thousands of times on Faux News if not hundreds of thousands of times on right wing media so I we can just do them one for one
Lie #1
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2013/nov/13/sean-hannity/hannity-says-government-predicted-massive-loss-hea/
Are you accusing Hannity of being an idiot or deliberately telling a lie? I certainly think he is an idiot, but I can't tell you if he lied there. I don't even think the very link you posted indicated he was lying. It implied he incompetently misinterpreted data.
And I certainly never agreed with the death panel talk. It was a shitty attempt by Republicans to undermine Obama and prey on extremists. They completely bastardized the language of a bill.
-
Are you accusing Hannity of being an idiot or deliberately telling a lie? I certainly think he is an idiot, but I can't tell you if he lied there. I don't even think the very link you posted indicated he was lying. It implied he incompetently misinterpreted data.
And I certainly never agreed with the death panel talk. It was a shitty attempt by Republicans to undermine Obama and prey on extremists. They completely bastardized the language of a bill.
yes he's lying
post your comparable lie and we'll go on to #2 and as far as you want to go
this is your premise
-
yes he's lying
post your comparable lie and we'll go on to #2 and as far as you want to go
this is your premise
This is a little more obvious, but you probably won't see it that way. It took me 5 seconds and I didn't have to dig into previous years. It's not quite as bad as the Zimmerman phone call, but still a horrible act of journalism
I should point out there is a difference between a journalist and a talk show host. But a news station employs them both, so neither should lie.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/10/16/msnbc-reporter-caught-lying-air-unarmed-palestinian-terrorist/
-
I think I've proven my point. You won't find a lie near the zimmerman lie. You likely won't find one as bad as the 2nd one I linked.
The difference between you and me is that I know fox news lies and stretches the truth, and I don't care for it. It make them look less credible.
You watch liberal news through rose colored glasses and it makes you look ignorant. Or maybe you are ignorant. Who knows?
-
This is a little more obvious, but you probably won't see it that way. It took me 5 seconds and I didn't have to dig into previous years. It's not quite as bad as the Zimmerman phone call, but still a horrible act of journalism
I should point out there is a difference between a journalist and a talk show host. But a news station employs them both, so neither should lie.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/10/16/msnbc-reporter-caught-lying-air-unarmed-palestinian-terrorist/
interesting
what happened to Ayman Mohyeldin?
has he been fired yet
I assume not (only the right wing news sources fire their liars)
here's #2
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/aug/15/tucker-carlson/carlson-guns-dont-kill-people-bathtubs-do/
-
I think I've proven my point. You won't find a lie near the zimmerman lie. You likely won't find one as bad as the 2nd one I linked.
The difference between you and me is that I know fox news lies and stretches the truth, and I don't care for it. It make them look less credible.
You watch liberal news through rose colored glasses and it makes you look ignorant. Or maybe you are ignorant. Who knows?
what is it you think you've proven?
one "lie" (questionably edited video) by one person about one story about one person who killed another person
for some reason it has huge significance for you
not sure what you think you've "proven"
please clarify
-
interesting
what happened to Ayman Mohyeldin?
has he been fired yet
I assume not (only the right wing news sources fire their liars)
here's #2
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/aug/15/tucker-carlson/carlson-guns-dont-kill-people-bathtubs-do/
Try googling the age range for childhood, dumbdick. Even your fact check sites are as dumb as you.
You aren't even coming up with good examples. I will start providing them for you. I almost feel sorry for you
-
Try googling the age range for childhood, dumbdick. Even your fact check sites are as dumb as you
so they fired this liar?
-
so they fired this liar?
The definition of childhood will prove he didn't lie
Math hard
-
The definition of childhood will prove he didn't lie
Math hard
cool
so fired or not?
-
I'm going to bed now. You've had all day to stew over this and mount your fierce comeback. I've got to say I'm disappointed. 240 produced better than you in his first attempt
-
I'm going to bed now. You've had all day to stew over this and mount your fierce comeback. I've got to say I'm disappointed. 240 produced better than you in his first attempt
you brought this person up as an example
I asked you a simple question about the person you mentioned
-
you brought this person up as an example
I asked you a simple question about the person you mentioned
You just keep babbling about someone getting fired. Can you clarify that for me? Are you referring to Tucker Carlson or the reporter that lied about the lack of a weapon? Slow down, and think before you type. You are having a typical meltdown as shizzo would put it. This is why I tell you to stick to arguing with Coach.
I'll address both. As far as Tucker Carlson, you will need to provide an example where he actually does lie. I don't know anyone that refers to 15-17 years old as children, nor will you find a child psychologist, etc that would. So on that point, your fact check organization is the liar, not Carlson. If you do the math by any normal definition of childhood, Carlson told the truth and your own article included 15-17 to fluff the numbers and try to manipulate data.
And i really don't know if the reporter on the Israeli thing was fired. You tell me. I know Israel is heavily pushing for it because he has a known history of bias and this wasn't an isolated incident
As for your Hannity example, I'm going to ask you what you ask Coach. Do you even read links or watch videos that you post links to? I'm gonna say you do, you are just that stupid. Your comedy central video doesn't show anything that anyone could even define as a lie. Your hannity criticism doesn't even call him a liar themselves. They imply he mistook the meaning and that his understanding is false. Learn the difference between false and a lie. One takes deliberation into account. Look the word "deliberation" up too, as I think that one will go over your head with the multiple syllables.
While we are on you the subject of you looking up definitions, look up the word "severity" as well. First off, you didn't even provide an example of a lie. Hypothetically, if we work off the assumption that you did, they hardly compared to the 2 that i linked. As I've repeated multiple times, you are either stupid or dishonest.
And finally, the irony in all this for me is that several weeks ago you tried side stepping the Hillary/Benghazi thread by asking us if we knew what a lie was. I thought you were trying to derail the conversation, but i understand now. You literally wanted 1 of us to define "lie" for you. Even being a simple little word, you have no clue what it means. That was also the same argument that you proved you don't know what your screen name means...
-
You just keep babbling about someone getting fired. Can you clarify that for me? Are you referring to Tucker Carlson or the reporter that lied about the lack of a weapon? Slow down, and think before you type. You are having a typical meltdown as shizzo would put it. This is why I tell you to stick to arguing with Coach.
I'll address both. As far as Tucker Carlson, you will need to provide an example where he actually does lie. I don't know anyone that refers to 15-17 years old as children, nor will you find a child psychologist, etc that would. So on that point, your fact check organization is the liar, not Carlson. If you do the math by any normal definition of childhood, Carlson told the truth and your own article included 15-17 to fluff the numbers and try to manipulate data.
And i really don't know if the reporter on the Israeli thing was fired. You tell me. I know Israel is heavily pushing for it because he has a known history of bias and this wasn't an isolated incident
As for your Hannity example, I'm going to ask you what you ask Coach. Do you even read links or watch videos that you post links to? I'm gonna say you do, you are just that stupid. Your comedy central video doesn't show anything that anyone could even define as a lie. Your hannity criticism doesn't even call him a liar themselves. They imply he mistook the meaning and that his understanding is false. Learn the difference between false and a lie. One takes deliberation into account. Look the word "deliberation" up too, as I think that one will go over your head with the multiple syllables.
While we are on you the subject of you looking up definitions, look up the word "severity" as well. First off, you didn't even provide an example of a lie. Hypothetically, if we work off the assumption that you did, they hardly compared to the 2 that i linked. As I've repeated multiple times, you are either stupid or dishonest.
And finally, the irony in all this for me is that several weeks ago you tried side stepping the Hillary/Benghazi thread by asking us if we knew what a lie was. I thought you were trying to derail the conversation, but i understand now. You literally wanted 1 of us to define "lie" for you. Even being a simple little word, you have no clue what it means. That was also the same argument that you proved you don't know what your screen name means...
what's so hard to understand
in the first example you gave the person was fired and the network apogolized
why has Fox never apologized or fired anyone in spite of the fact that they lie all day ...every day
they lied for 2 years about Bengazi. Not just one person altering one tape but multiple people lying day in and day out for 2 years and then when they get the facts from a Republican investigation they fail to report those facts. They fail to correct their lies. They fail to apologize for their lies
No apology for lies about death panels. No apology for all the times they identified a scandal ridden Republican as a Democrat.
Now, on with list. I'll try to give you a few more today if I have time.
As you know there is no shortage of lies to choose from
This is particularly salient because it's multiple people repeating the same lie (the very thing I've been talking about regarding Faux News) and then another Faux New liar saying they never said it
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/27/bill-oreilly/oreilly-says-no-one-fox-raised-issue-jail-time-not/
Now let's analyze O'Reilly's specific statement.
It turns out that several Fox shows did mention the possibility of jail time. Here are some examples:
• Paul Gigot, host of the Journal Editorial Reports, Oct. 3, 2009
"Democrats want to require you to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. But they don't want you to call it a tax. Under the Baucus bill, the so-called individual mandate would require everyone to buy health insurance or pay as much as a $1,900 fee. If you don't pay up, the IRS could punish you with a $25,000 fine or a year in jail."
• Sean Hannity, interviewing Greg Mueller, the president of CRC Public Relations, and Penny Lee, a Democratic strategist, on Nov. 10, 2009
Hannity: "Jail? Is that..."
Mueller: "We are losing freedom. The Berlin Wall anniversary is just the other day. And these are the kind of policies that used to be imposed on people behind that wall. One problem we're going to have, though, Sean, they're going to have, though, Sean, they're going to have to do something about prisons. They're going to put all these people in jail. It costs $50,000 a year to take care of a prisoner. So they're going to have to do prison reform."
Hannity: "That's going to be true."
Mueller: "Democrats don't like to do prisons."
Hannity: "Put people in jail if they don't get their government mandated health? We're going to tax business. We're going to tax individuals. There's going to be fines. There's going to be penalties. There's a millionaire's tax. We're paying for it through the wall. This is what you want? Your socialist utopia, Penny."
Lee: "You're not in socialist utopia. What they're trying to do is bring competitive choice and bring affordable quality health care."
Hannity: "People in jail?"
• Andrew Napolitano, guest-hosting the Glenn Beck Program, Nov. 10, 2009
"For the first time in American history, if this bill becomes law, the feds will force you to buy insurance you might not want or may not need or cannot afford. If you don't purchase what the government tells you to buy, if you don't do so when they tell you to do it, if you don't buy just what they say is right for you, the government may fine you, prosecute you, and even put you in jail."
• Glenn Beck, on his Fox show, Nov. 12, 2009
"But if you don't play by their new rules on health care -- oh, here's a new little twist. Have you heard this? You're going to be looking at a fun little stint in jail."
Later in the show, Beck said, "And oh, yes, the potential jail time. If you don't have health insurance? Jail time. You heard Nancy Pelosi defend that portion of the bill just a few minutes ago. There has got to be some way to force everybody to have health care, right? It is jail."
So we found at least four cases in which hosts or guests brought up the possibility of people being jailed for not having health insurance. Given the amount of programming hours that Fox aired during the health care debate, that's not an overwhelming number of mentions, and if O'Reilly had simply said that Fox didn't beat the drum too loudly on that specific provision, we'd be tempted to give him a pass. But he not only said definitively that "nobody's ever said it" on the network, but also said that his staff had researched the question. So we are left to conclude that either his staff muffed its research or that O'Reilly trying to pull a fast one.
One would think the story ends there, but it doesn't. On April 15, 2010, two days after his initial claim, O'Reilly managed to dig himself deeper.
Faced with evidence from the liberal group Media Matters that jail time had indeed been discussed on Fox, O'Reilly sought to clarify what he meant the first time around.
"Now as we all know, the prison option was taken off the table when the final Obama care bill was being debated," O'Reilly said. "And that's what we were talking to Sen. Coburn about, the final bill debate. Not all that stuff. So, what I said is absolutely true. Nobody at Fox News reported inaccurately about the Obamacare prison situation. Nobody. Yet, Media Matters, as they always do, distorted the entire situation. Shamefully, NBC News and Time magazine lapped up the garbage and put it right out there."
The way we see it, O'Reilly is rewriting history. We see no evidence in his initial statement that he was referring to Fox's references to jail time only during a specific time period. And he subtly tried to bolster his case by the clips he chose to accompany his April 15 comment.
He used two clips to illustrate how Fox had dealt with the question of jail time in the past, both of which consisted of footage of journalists from other networks asking Obama and Pelosi a jail-related question at legitimate news events. Using those clips made it seem to viewers like Fox was getting blasted from the left simply for reporting on genuine news events, when in fact the criticism had to do instead with comments by Beck, Hannity and other hosts and guests who used the Fox platform to attack the health care bill.
O'Reilly said nobody had "ever" said on Fox that you risked jail if you don't buy health insurance, and to us, "ever" means "ever." So we don't buy O'Reilly's after-the-fact defense. We rate his claim Pants on Fire!
-
You just keep babbling about someone getting fired. Can you clarify that for me? Are you referring to Tucker Carlson or the reporter that lied about the lack of a weapon? Slow down, and think before you type. You are having a typical meltdown as shizzo would put it. This is why I tell you to stick to arguing with Coach.
I'll address both. As far as Tucker Carlson, you will need to provide an example where he actually does lie. I don't know anyone that refers to 15-17 years old as children, nor will you find a child psychologist, etc that would. So on that point, your fact check organization is the liar, not Carlson. If you do the math by any normal definition of childhood, Carlson told the truth and your own article included 15-17 to fluff the numbers and try to manipulate data.
And i really don't know if the reporter on the Israeli thing was fired. You tell me. I know Israel is heavily pushing for it because he has a known history of bias and this wasn't an isolated incident
As for your Hannity example, I'm going to ask you what you ask Coach. Do you even read links or watch videos that you post links to? I'm gonna say you do, you are just that stupid. Your comedy central video doesn't show anything that anyone could even define as a lie. Your hannity criticism doesn't even call him a liar themselves. They imply he mistook the meaning and that his understanding is false. Learn the difference between false and a lie. One takes deliberation into account. Look the word "deliberation" up too, as I think that one will go over your head with the multiple syllables.
While we are on you the subject of you looking up definitions, look up the word "severity" as well. First off, you didn't even provide an example of a lie. Hypothetically, if we work off the assumption that you did, they hardly compared to the 2 that i linked. As I've repeated multiple times, you are either stupid or dishonest.
And finally, the irony in all this for me is that several weeks ago you tried side stepping the Hillary/Benghazi thread by asking us if we knew what a lie was. I thought you were trying to derail the conversation, but i understand now. You literally wanted 1 of us to define "lie" for you. Even being a simple little word, you have no clue what it means. That was also the same argument that you proved you don't know what your screen name means...
Whoa. Now this is a Dos Equis approved beat down. Well done. :)
-
Whoa. Now this is a Dos Equis approved beat down. Well done. :)
You want to join this fight Bum... fine with me
you've always been such a pussy that you usually run away
Let's remember his premise
"I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time."
I'm just getting started
Do you realize how many years of documented lies their are for Faux News
So far our new poster has 2 examples of his premise and in the first example the person was fired and the network apologized (I think I might have mentioned that before). And the two examples he provided don't really support his premise. In both cases you have an individual appearing to act on their own
With Faux News it's comprehensive and apparently coordinated repeating of the same lie over and over again and then comprehensive and coordinated avoidance of reporting facts about those situations (when the facts become available)
Please start posting examples of his premise to this thread
-
"I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time."
Jon Stewart made a career ( and a nice paycheck) from exposing FOX news.
They are a propaganda station not a news network.
-
You want to join this fight Bum... fine with me
you've always been such a pussy that you usually run away
Let's remember his premise
I'm just getting started
Do you realize how many years of documented lies their are for Faux News
So far our new poster has 2 examples of his premise and in the first example the person was fired and the network apologized (I think I might have mentioned that before). And the two examples he provided don't really support his premise. In both cases you have an individual appearing to act on their own
With Faux News it's comprehensive and apparently coordinated repeating of the same lie over and over again and then comprehensive and coordinated avoidance of reporting facts about those situations (when the facts become available)
Please start posting examples of his premise to this thread
No one thinks you look like the victor here except you, and probably not even you. I could continue to cite examples but I won't do so as you claim the 2 I did cite had nothing to do with the network.
You have been madeto look like an idiot this entire thread. Everyone here now knows you to be a false intellectual. You don't even know what your screen name means and have stopped denying it at this point.
I'll let you call whatever this a beat down if you want because I'm tired of debating the severity of a lie. It's as if you couldn't distinguish the difference between stealing 5 bucks or a ferrari. If you are that stupid, I'm picking on the mentally handicap. If you aren't that stupid and only in denial, then I won't get you to acknowledge anything anyhow.
-
"I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time."
Jon Stewart made a career ( and a nice paycheck) from exposing FOX news.
They are a propaganda station not a news network.
Jon Stewart is a liberal comedian. He made a career out of shitting on fox news to a liberal audience, In a comedic fashion. The same could be done with msnbc or cnn if a comedian were to lean that way. It doesn't mean fox lies more than liberal networks. It means he was biased and selected fox as his target.
In case you are as incompetent as strawman, the above paragraph means I certainly believe fox lies, just no more so and likely less so than the others. Strawman is having a hard time even presenting an argument so I wouldn't side with him if I were you
-
No one thinks you look like the victor here except you, and probably not even you. I could continue to cite examples but I won't do so as you claim the 2 I did cite had nothing to do with the network.
You have been madeto look like an idiot this entire thread. Everyone here now knows you to be a false intellectual. You don't even know what your screen name means and have stopped denying it at this point.
I'll let you call whatever this a beat down if you want because I'm tired of debating the severity of a lie. It's as if you couldn't distinguish the difference between stealing 5 bucks or a ferrari. If you are that stupid, I'm picking on the mentally handicap. If you aren't that stupid and only in denial, then I won't get you to acknowledge anything anyhow.
LOL- so now you're just down to name calling
You don't want to discusse your premise:
I can't say I've every seen fox news lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media did by editing the George zimmerman phone call in attempts to make it a racist attack on a young black kid. And that it one incident. The leftist media jumps the gun and lies, edits things like this all the time."
as you wrote, that is one incident and as I've pointed out, unlike Faux News, NBC admitted it, apologized and fired the guy
So let's start going over all the other incidents.
I've got hundreds of examples of lies from Faux News still to go and that doesn't even include the selective editing of videos
Should I start adding those now or will you just respond with more name calling
How about you start adding more incidents to support your premise and try to include one as egregious and obvious as Faux News where mulitiple people say the lie over and over again, day in and day out
I'm sure you've got plenty of examples so let's seem them
-
LOL- so now you're just down to name calling
You don't want to discusse your premise:
as you wrote, that is one incident and as I've pointed out, unlike Faux News, NBC admitted it, apologized and fired the guy
So let's start going over all the other incidents.
I've got hundreds of examples of lies from Faux News still do go and that doesn't even include the selective editing of videos
Should I start adding those now or will you just respond with more name calling
How about you start adding more incidents to support your premise and try to include one as egregious and obvious as Faux News where mulitiple people say the lie over and over again, day in and day out
I'm sure you've got plenty of examples so let's seem them
I've never been above name calling when i feel it fits, and in your case I believe my description to be accurate. If you were honest, I would certainly discuss it. And as far as what you've produced, I still hold my original stance, and all you've done over the course of 2 days is strengthen it. Everyone else knows it. Why do you think your usual liberal buddies haven't jumped in this one like they do with coach?
You need to cite strong examples if you really wanna win this, but you cant. You keep citing silly nonsense while i post real examples that are a disservice to the entire journalistic community.
And I will continue to call you out on not knowing what your screen name means because you don't or at least you didn't until I called you on it. I'm gonna call you another name now because I'm fond of telling the truth. You are my intellectual inferior and everyone on this board knows it. So, post more shitty examples and while you are steadily googling strong ones, take the time to Google a new screen name that fits your debate style more appropriately. Maybe something that involves getting your feces pushed in by another person, as that would certainly fit what's happened here the last 2 days
-
I've never been above name calling when i feel it fits, and in your case I believe my description to be accurate. If you were honest, I would certainly discuss it. And as far as what you've produced, I still hold my original stance, and all you've done over the course of 2 days is strengthen it. Everyone else knows it. Why do you think your usual liberal buddies haven't jumped in this one like they do with coach?
You need to cite strong examples if you really wanna win this, but you cant. You keep citing silly nonsense while i post real examples that are a disservice to the entire journalistic community.
And I will continue to call you out on not knowing what your screen name means because you don't or at least you didn't until I called you on it. I'm gonna call you another name now because I'm fond of telling the truth. You are my intellectual inferior and everyone on this board knows it. So, post more shitty examples and while you are steadily googling strong ones, take the time to Google a new screen name that fits your debate style more appropriately. Maybe something that involves getting your feces pushed in by another person, as that would certainly fit what's happened here the last 2 days
you've posting a whopping 2 examples
BFD
I've cited Faux News lying about Bengazi virtually every day for 2 years and then failing to report the facts of the Republican investigation which proved false virtually everyhing they had said
I've cited Faux New inciting racial intolerance on a daily basis with their reporting of Ferguson and then failing to report the result of second DOJ investigation showing that the years of racially charged incidents
I've pointed out the habit of Faux News to routinely report scandal ridden Republicans as Democrats
and then I started giving you multiple example of daily lies
I haven't even started giving you the edited video from Faux News yet
somehow these ongoing, daily, top down lies by many many different people don't compare to one person deleting one line out of a phone call.
Apparently your personal "exchange rate" has determined that your two isolated incidents somehow prove that Faux New doesn't "lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media"
Is that about the sum of it?
You've got only two isolated examples
I assumed you had many more to provide to support your premise
Let's see them
-
Jon Stewart is a liberal comedian. He made a career out of shitting on fox news to a liberal audience, In a comedic fashion. The same could be done with msnbc or cnn if a comedian were to lean that way. It doesn't mean fox lies more than liberal networks. It means he was biased and selected fox as his target.
In case you are as incompetent as strawman, the above paragraph means I certainly believe fox lies, just no more so and likely less so than the others. Strawman is having a hard time even presenting an argument so I wouldn't side with him if I were you
He targets msnbc and CNN as well. They just dont produce as much material as FOX.
Try watching Stewart's program and you will fell differently.
-
you've posting a whopping 2 examples
BFD
I've cited Faux News lying about Bengazi virtually every day for 2 years and then failing to report the facts of the Republican investigation which proved false virtually everyhing they had said
I've cited Faux New inciting racial intolerance on a daily basis with their reporting of Ferguson and then failing to report the result of second DOJ investigation showing that the years of racially charged incidents
I've pointed out the habit of Faux News to routinely report scandal ridden Republicans as Democrats
and then I started giving you multiple example of daily lies
I haven't even started giving you the edited video from Faux News yet
somehow these ongoing, daily, top down lies by many many different people don't compare to one person deleting one line out of a phone call.
Apparently your personal "exchange rate" has determined that your two isolated incidents somehow prove that Faux New doesn't "lie or omit facts near to the point that the leftist media"
Is that about the sum of it?
You've got only two isolated examples
I assumed you had many more to provide to support your premise
Let's see them
I've posted 2 examples because 2 examples were all that was necessary. You haven't posted 1 example near the caliber of the 2 I've posted, and I haven't spent days researching for the best examples like you. The Zimmerman one is well known, and the other one took about 2 seconds worth of google and actually occurred within the last month. There is no need for me to post more examples until you post one equivalent or worse than what I've posted. You have barely posted anything that constitutes a lie, and that's if I'm being generous.
Hell, you don't even know what ages define childhood. You posted a fluffy article that lied from one of your political fact checking sites. Apparently that site is slanted to the left or as incompetent as you, because it took me 1 read of their article to tell that it was false and they added in a 15-17 demographic. You need to use your recommendation to coach and actually read/understand before you post. If you weren't so biased, you would have easily caught the lie about children's deaths.
You haven't cited a single racial intolerance on fox's behalf. The Ferguson shooting and riots were all proven to be triggered by a lie. Your opinion doesn't constitute numerous facts, it constitutes stupidity. I've read the entire DOJ report and I don't think you have, otherwise you wouldn't be quoting it as good reference material. Go read it, and then go read explanations of it. Eric Holder made an ass out of himself there and tried to save face, but the initial issue was all a witch hunt of a white officer because he shot a guilty black teenager and msnbc, cnn, etc all jumped the gun with their reporting and did so erroneously.
You've pointed out the habit of fox to report republicans as democrats, yet you have still failed to provide an example as such.
You haven't given numerous daily lies. If I'm being generous, I will say you've pointed out 1 lie.
I have many more examples than 2, but 2 were all it took to make you look stupider than you normally do. I don't have to play catch-up while I'm ahead.
I'm a softie for helping stupid people, so I'm gonna help you with your debate tactics.
When 1 party posts a strong example that actually is a lie, the other party should counter with an equal or stronger example.
You didn't do that, you instead posted a comedic video that showed zero lies.
Then you actually tried the typical getbigger excuse and said you were too busy (i bet you were too busy making 1 million bucks and crushing sweet pussy). You were too busy to find examples that you claim to be readily available but you had time to link a video...I find that suspect. If I knew examples to be readily available, I would take 2 seconds to find a good one versus scrounging through youtube to find a comedic video, your time being so precious and all.
Then you have tried the denial excuse with both examples i've posted while they are blatantly obvious.
And the cherry on top of your stupidity is actually posting an article that was a lie from your fact checking site. It discredits much of what that site puts out now.
I think I covered all of your post. Let me know if I need to make you feel any dumber.
-
He targets msnbc and CNN as well. They just dont produce as much material as FOX.
Try watching Stewart's program and you will fell differently.
I've watched Stewart many times. I find him highly intelligent and quite funny. I also find him biased. They produce just as much material, don't be naive.
-
I've watched Stewart many times. I find him highly intelligent and quite funny. I also find him biased. They produce just as much material, don't be naive.
I have never watched the other stations, so im not going to argue about that.
NBC scores pretty good though:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
FOX on the other hand? I would feel like an idiot if they were my main source of information:
http://www.mintpressnews.com/pants-on-fire-analysis-shows-60-of-fox-news-facts-are-really-lies/205563/
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/fact-checking-site-finds-fox-news-tells-truth-18-percent-time/
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/06/fact-checker-finds-60-fox-news-statements-false-lie.html
-
I have never watched the other stations, so im not going to argue about that.
NBC scores pretty good though:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/nbc/
FOX on the other hand? I would feel like an idiot if they were my main source of information:
http://www.mintpressnews.com/pants-on-fire-analysis-shows-60-of-fox-news-facts-are-really-lies/205563/
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/fact-checking-site-finds-fox-news-tells-truth-18-percent-time/
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/06/fact-checker-finds-60-fox-news-statements-false-lie.html
Did you really just cite politifact? Have you been reading all these posts?
That is the cite that fluffed the numbers of gun deaths of children to report Tucker Carlson as a liar.
They are liberal and biased
I can find a site right now that says msnbc lies 85% of the time, but I'm not going to do that because it is dishonest and that site is likely conservative.
-
My mistake. You quoted punditfact. I can't say I'm familiar with them nor will I research them. My apologies.
No problem it happens. I dont know about all the above sources maybe some of them have bias, but its a place to start at least when trying to figure out a something like this.
-
I've posted 2 examples because 2 examples were all that was necessary. You haven't posted 1 example near the caliber of the 2 I've posted, and I haven't spent days researching for the best examples like you. The Zimmerman one is well known, and the other one took about 2 seconds worth of google and actually occurred within the last month. There is no need for me to post more examples until you post one equivalent or worse than what I've posted. You have barely posted anything that constitutes a lie, and that's if I'm being generous.
Hell, you don't even know what ages define childhood. You posted a fluffy article that lied from one of your political fact checking sites. Apparently that site is slanted to the left or as incompetent as you, because it took me 1 read of their article to tell that it was false and they added in a 15-17 demographic. You need to use your recommendation to coach and actually read/understand before you post. If you weren't so biased, you would have easily caught the lie about children's deaths.
You haven't cited a single racial intolerance on fox's behalf. The Ferguson shooting and riots were all proven to be triggered by a lie. Your opinion doesn't constitute numerous facts, it constitutes stupidity. I've read the entire DOJ report and I don't think you have, otherwise you wouldn't be quoting it as good reference material. Go read it, and then go read explanations of it. Eric Holder made an ass out of himself there and tried to save face, but the initial issue was all a witch hunt of a white officer because he shot a guilty black teenager and msnbc, cnn, etc all jumped the gun with their reporting and did so erroneously.
You've pointed out the habit of fox to report republicans as democrats, yet you have still failed to provide an example as such.
You haven't given numerous daily lies. If I'm being generous, I will say you've pointed out 1 lie.
I have many more examples than 2, but 2 were all it took to make you look stupider than you normally do. I don't have to play catch-up while I'm ahead.
I'm a softie for helping stupid people, so I'm gonna help you with your debate tactics.
When 1 party posts a strong example that actually is a lie, the other party should counter with an equal or stronger example.
You didn't do that, you instead posted a comedic video that showed zero lies.
Then you actually tried the typical getbigger excuse and said you were too busy (i bet you were too busy making 1 million bucks and crushing sweet pussy). You were too busy to find examples that you claim to be readily available but you had time to link a video...I find that suspect. If I knew examples to be readily available, I would take 2 seconds to find a good one versus scrounging through youtube to find a comedic video, your time being so precious and all.
Then you have tried the denial excuse with both examples i've posted while they are blatantly obvious.
And the cherry on top of your stupidity is actually posting an article that was a lie from your fact checking site. It discredits much of what that site puts out now.
I think I covered all of your post. Let me know if I need to make you feel any dumber.
I completely disagree
your one example is one incident by one person that as far as I can tell aired one time or a few times
that one person deleted one line out of a telephone call and you've decided it somehow trumps YEARS or coordinated lies, repeatedly daily by many many people about much more serious events (unless you Fergeson and Bengazi are less serious the the Trayvon Martin murder)
lies that are egregious, never acknowledged and never apolized for
Isn't this exactly where we started 2 pages ago
your belief that this single event was some kind of atomic bomb that proves your premise
-
He targets msnbc and CNN as well. They just dont produce as much material as FOX.
Try watching Stewart's program and you will fell differently.
If Stewart mentions it then the facts that he is citing are rendered moot
very convenient way to dismiss the entire set of facts for weak minded people
-
Did you really just cite politifact? Have you been reading all these posts?
That is the cite that fluffed the numbers of gun deaths of children to report Tucker Carlson as a liar.
They are liberal and biased
I can find a site right now that says msnbc lies 85% of the time, but I'm not going to do that because it is dishonest and that site is likely conservative.
post it
and the only one fluffing anything is you
More children died of accidental gun death than from drowning unless you want to "fluff the numbers" and selectively choose only one age range while ignoring the others and of course ignoring the total as well
doesn't suprise me that you would do that since you've decided on isolated incident of seletive editing by one person outweighs years of coordinated lying by many many different people
Carson said
"Far more children died last year drowning in their bathtubs than were killed accidentally by guns," Carlson said. "I’d like to see a package on ‘Do you have a bathtub at home because I want to know before I let my child go over to your house.’ A little perspective might be helpful."
-
post it
and the only one fluffing anything is you
More children died of accidental gun death than from drowning unless you want to "fluff the numbers" and selectively choose only one age range while ignoring the other and of course ignoring the total as well
doesn't suprise me that you would do that since you've decided on isolated incident of seletive editing by one person outweighs years of coordinated lying by many many different people
Carson said
"Far more children died last year drowning in their bathtubs than were killed accidentally by guns," Carlson said. "I’d like to see a package on ‘Do you have a bathtub at home because I want to know before I let my child go over to your house.’ A little perspective might be helpful."
No, I didn't choose an age range. Carlson did, and what he said about the age range is true. You can't honestly be that dense. The statement "more children died in a bathtub" by the very chart you posted is true. I don't know why they included other age groups that don't qualify as childhood, maybe to cater to idiots like you that don't think when they read something
-
I completely disagree
your one example is one incident by one person that as far as I can tell aired one time or a few times
that one person deleted one line out of a telephone call and you've decided it somehow trumps YEARS or coordinated lies, repeatedly daily by many many people about much more serious events (unless you Fergeson and Bengazi are less serious the the Trayvon Martin murder)
lies that are egregious, never acknowledged and never apolized for
Isn't this exactly where we started 2 pages ago
your belief that this single event was some kind of atomic bomb that proves your premise
It wasn't just a matter of one line being deleted. It was deliberation to make his motive seem racist, but that doesn't support your narrative so you try to diminish the significance of it.
I absolutely consider Ferguson important, Benghazi not so much (in the context that republicans are pursuing it).
Liberal networks lied and produced a racial narrative in regards to Ferguson when they knew they had none of the facts. Whats your point there? I didn't know that you cared about liberal media telling lies. Fox on the other hand urged viewers not to jump to conclusion until the facts were released.
As far as Benghazi, Hillary Clinton is a liar. That being said, republicans need to stop wasting time because her email didn't get those guys killed. She performed her job poorly, but she didn't deliberately kill them, and republicans are wasting tax dollars pursuing it.
You hurt yourself the more you type
-
It wasn't just a matter of one line being deleted. It was deliberation to make his motive seem racist, but that doesn't support your narrative so you try to diminish the significance of it.
I absolutely consider Ferguson important, Benghazi not so much (in the context that republicans are pursuing it).
Liberal networks lied and produced a racial narrative in regards to Ferguson when they knew they had none of the facts. Whats your point there? I didn't know that you cared about liberal media telling lies. Fox on the other hand urged viewers not to jump to conclusion until the facts were released.
As far as Benghazi, Hillary Clinton is a liar. That being said, republicans need to stop wasting time because her email didn't get those guys killed. She performed her job poorly, but she didn't deliberately kill them, and republicans are wasting tax dollars pursuing it.
You hurt yourself the more you type
in fact it was about one key line was deleted
the assumption of motive are yours and the grandiose assumptions of it's impact are yours as well
http://gawker.com/5898876/nbc-apologizes-for-editing-george-zimmermans-911-call-on-today-show
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black.
vs
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy - is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
And how many times did this run on the air
It's not exactly like this one edited phone call incited a race riot
Now compare that to what was happening in Ferguson and look at Faux News daily, repetetive incendiary coverage
And of course when the DOJ released it's reports they chose to exclusively cover only one report (that the debunked the "hands up don't shoot narrative) while completely ignoring the other report that listed years of racial charged incidents
Yeah, that's just no comparison to one edited phone call, done by one single person that might have aired once or a few times
nothing mentioned in the video below matters once it's aired on a comedy show
-
No, I didn't choose an age range. Carlson did, and what he said about the age range is true. You can't honestly be that dense. The statement "more children died in a bathtub" by the very chart you posted is true. I don't know why they included other age groups that don't qualify as childhood, maybe to cater to idiots like you that don't think when they read something
no Carson did not and the link I provided had this additional information
by his statement you could logically EXCLUDE 0-4 year olds from what he was talking about
We reached out to Carlson to learn the source of his claim about deaths in bathtubs and deaths from guns. We didn’t hear back. Carlson didn’t say what age children he had in mind, but in the context of the story he was responding to — and his rhetorical question about something "I want to know before I let my child go over to your house" — this is not about children under 4 years old. Parents don't let toddlers "go over" to a friend’s house. For that age range, Carlson’s comparison is off by a factor of three. Bathtubs caused 22 deaths for kids 5 and older and guns caused 73 deaths.
-
no Carson did not and the link I provided had this additional information
by his statement you could logically EXCLUDE 0-4 year olds from what he was talking about
You are a true moron. In the context of children, only an idiot would think he excluded 0-4 yet included 15-17. He didn't say it and i can't fathom where anyone would assume that, and then call it fact.
Toddlers go to other's houses all the times. I often watch the toddlers of friends...
-
in fact it was about one key line was deleted
the assumption of motive are yours and the grandiose assumptions of it's impact are yours as well
http://gawker.com/5898876/nbc-apologizes-for-editing-george-zimmermans-911-call-on-today-show
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black.
vs
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy - is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
And how many times did this run on the air
It's not exactly like this one edited phone call incited a race riot
Now compare that to what was happening in Ferguson and look at Faux News daily, repetetive incendiary coverage
And of course when the DOJ released it's reports they chose to exclusively cover only one report (that the debunked the "hands up don't shoot narrative) while completely ignoring the other report that listed years of racial charged incidents
Yeah, that's just no comparison to one edited phone call, done by one single person that might have aired once or a few times
nothing mentioned in the video below matters once it's aired on a comedy show
Not even gonna address this again. You are grasping at straws. In fact, change your name to Graspin@strawman
-
NBC was proven correct when zimmerman called obama a monkey.
they knew he was a racist years before the republicans on getbig would admit it.
-
NBC was proven correct when zimmerman called obama a monkey.
they knew he was a racist years before the republicans on getbig would admit it.
Wrong, they made up a story to push a racial narrative. While I agree with you that he is likely a piece of shit, they crafted a story with no awareness that he was a piece of shit. Are you suggesting that NBC has prophetic vision? I'll remind you, what we know him as now has nothing to do with the news they reported.
-
Wrong, they made up a story to push a racial narrative. While I agree with you that he is likely a piece of shit, they crafted a story with no awareness that he was a piece of shit. Are you suggesting that NBC has prophetic vision? I'll remind you, what we know him as now has nothing to do with the news they reported.
I've said all along that it wasn't about race - zimmerman's team, the prosecution said the same thing.
The only people saying it was about race were those on message boards, adn those on FOX radio talking about race wars, and msnbc wimps.
If trayvon is white and dressed like that, he gets followed. If trayvon is black and he looks like condi rice, he doesn't get followed. Zimm thought he was chasing a bike thief.
NBC was shady as fck, but they were proven right when that piece of shit zimmerman called obama a monkey and showed he was a racist dick head all along. I still think he was a racist a-hole that chased him because he thought he was the dude that stole his bike. not cause of skin color.
-
I've said all along that it wasn't about race - zimmerman's team, the prosecution said the same thing.
The only people saying it was about race were those on message boards, adn those on FOX radio talking about race wars, and msnbc wimps.
If trayvon is white and dressed like that, he gets followed. If trayvon is black and he looks like condi rice, he doesn't get followed. Zimm thought he was chasing a bike thief.
NBC was shady as fck, but they were proven right when that piece of shit zimmerman called obama a monkey and showed he was a racist dick head all along. I still think he was a racist a-hole that chased him because he thought he was the dude that stole his bike. not cause of skin color.
No, they weren't proven right. They butchered a phone call and edited it to create a racial narrative. There is nothing right about that. Whether or not george zimmerman is a piece of shit has nothing to do with msnbc's misconduct. You know better than that, and I'm not gonna talk to you as if you are as dumb as strawman. There is no proving right or wrong here. The misconduct they engaged in was an isolated incident completely unaware of the quality of human being zimmerman is.
-
I've said all along that it wasn't about race - zimmerman's team, the prosecution said the same thing.
The only people saying it was about race were those on message boards, adn those on FOX radio talking about race wars, and msnbc wimps.
If trayvon is white and dressed like that, he gets followed. If trayvon is black and he looks like condi rice, he doesn't get followed. Zimm thought he was chasing a bike thief.
NBC was shady as fck, but they were proven right when that piece of shit zimmerman called obama a monkey and showed he was a racist dick head all along. I still think he was a racist a-hole that chased him because he thought he was the dude that stole his bike. not cause of skin color.
Just for shits and giggles, can you post the link to where he called obama a monkey.
-
No, they weren't proven right.
They said he was a racist. He later called obama a monkey.
Now, their call was fake as fck, and they should be sued and mocked for their shit shady work. BUT they were right about him being a straight up racist. They just forged evidence to show it.
-
Just for shits and giggles, can you post the link to where he called obama a monkey.
sorry, it was not monkey.
George Zimmerman Calls President Obama An 'Ignorant Baboon'
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2015/08/27/george-zimmerman-goes-all-out-against-obama-for-not-condemning-virginia/
or jsut google it.
-
They said he was a racist. He later called obama a monkey.
Now, their call was fake as fck, and they should be sued and mocked for their shit shady work. BUT they were right about him being a straight up racist. They just forged evidence to show it.
Once again, they weren't right. They didn't base their accusations on anything that we like to call evidence. All they knew is that a non-black shot a black, and they ran with it from there. That is not getting it right and i can't imagine how you would suggest it is.
He may be a racist. I can't say with certainty that he is, but it wouldn't shock me if you are right. That being said, msnbc didn't base that on any reliable evidence. they just called him a racist and hoped they were right
-
sorry, it was not monkey.
George Zimmerman Calls President Obama An 'Ignorant Baboon'
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2015/08/27/george-zimmerman-goes-all-out-against-obama-for-not-condemning-virginia/
or jsut google it.
Would it be fair to assume that if you were made into a racist by Obama/Eric Holder, absent of the truth and real events, that you might resent the president and use derogatory words that you wouldn't have used previously? I suspect i might have a fair amount of resentment against obama/eric holder if they railroaded me to push their racial agenda
-
Would it be fair to assume that if you were made into a racist by Obama/Eric Holder, absent of the truth and real events, that you might resent the president and use derogatory words that you wouldn't have used previously? I suspect i might have a fair amount of resentment against obama/eric holder if they railroaded me to push their racial agenda
so, you're saying zimmerman wasn't a racist. then obama pissed him off recently, and maybe zimmerman became one then?
-
I'll ask you another question, 240. Can one arrive at a racist behavior as a result of racist misconduct by Obama/eric holder. If you don't get the just of what i suggested there, could zimmerman not be a racist prior to this event, yet be a racist afterwards as a result of obama/holder pushing their own racial narrative
-
so, you're saying zimmerman wasn't a racist. then obama pissed him off recently, and maybe zimmerman became one then?
that's exactly what i'm suggesting. Obama/Holder made a false narrative and persecuted him for shooting someone that assaulted him. I assume that could build some resentment. I'm not saying it's right, but it certainly is plausible