Right Wing Lie of The Day - Page 2

cnredd · 11-08-05, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipsterdufus

3 republican responses and not ONE refutes any charge, only name calling. Typical.

"I wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel."
Zell Miller

If you "duel" by using, as your weapon, an admittedly biased website, then I suggest you walk out of the forum, take a deep breath, then come back in and HOPEFULLY the members won't remember your first impressions on this thread...

Your idea of refuting is pathetic and an insult...

"A slanted website says "this"....Now go refute it."...

Can you hear it?...Listen close....There it is again!.....

DemocraticUnderground is calling you...

hipsterdufus · 11-08-05, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

If you "duel" by using, as your weapon, an admittedly biased website, then I suggest you walk out of the forum, take a deep breath, then come back in and HOPEFULLY the members won't remember your first impressions on this thread...

Your idea of refuting is pathetic and an insult...

"A slanted website says "this"....Now go refute it."...

Can you hear it?...Listen close....There it is again!.....

DemocraticUnderground is calling you...

At first glance I see seven threads on "liberal bias"in this forum. Have you vilified those thread starters too and asked them to go back to Freeper world?

Note - 4 responses and counting....

cnredd · 11-09-05, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipsterdufus

At first glance I see seven threads on "liberal bias"in this forum. Have you vilified those thread starters too and asked them to go back to Freeper world?

Note - 4 responses and counting....

From my first comment....

A Conservative tried this idiotic stunt not too long ago...

The only thing your dissenting on is the BIAS,...that is NOT the issue...

The other threads you speak of are not doing the same thing you are doing...which is just throwing out articles followed by articles followed by articles followed by articles...no debatable questions...no topic "angles"...just articles after articles...

I'm pretty sure anyone over the age of 6 could do that...Why bother?

You say "refute this", but put up multiples events!....What are we supposed to do???...Hunt down opposing positions for the next three hours in hopes that we find one that matches even ONE of yours????...And even if we did, your just gonna cry "partisan" anyway...

This whole thread reeks of you screaming... Well how about THIS?"...."Well what about THAT?"..."You didn't mention anything about THIS ONE!"...on & on ad nauseum...

The only difference between what you've done and my link is that you followed the forum rules and actually provided a link...

But the message behind it is still the same...

BTW - You know how much credibility someplace like AnnCoulter.com" would have if I used it as a source?....MediaMatters is much worse...

They even admit they target Conservatives in their "about" section...

They only thing more childish in a debate forum than using partisan sources is using photoshopped pictures....

So far you're 0-for-2...

hipsterdufus · 11-09-05, 09:27 AM

Scott McClellan on torture:

At a White House press conference yesterday, Scott McClellan repeatedly dodged questions about the disconnect between President Bush's statements that America does not do torture, while VP Cheney is lobbying for a terror exemption for the CIA. At one point McClellan questioned the patriotism of the reporters asking for clarification.

Quote:

Q I'd like you to clear up, once and for all, the ambiguity about torture. Can we get a straight answer? The President says we don't do torture, but Cheney --

MR. McCLELLAN: That's about as straight as it can be.

Q Yes, but Cheney has gone to the Senate and asked for an exemption on --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, he has not. Are you claiming he's asked for an exemption on torture? No, that's --

...
Q He didn't ask for an exemption --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and we are going to --

Q -- answer that one question. I'm asking, is the administration asking for an exemption?

MR. McCLELLAN: I am answering your question. The President has made it very clear that we are going to do --

Q You're not answering -- yes or no?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, you don't want the American people to hear what the facts are, Helen, and I'm going to tell them the facts.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1001436211

hipsterdufus · 11-09-05, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

From my first comment....

A Conservative tried this idiotic stunt not too long ago...

The only thing your dissenting on is the BIAS,...that is NOT the issue...

The other threads you speak of are not doing the same thing you are doing...which is just throwing out articles followed by articles followed by articles followed by articles...no debatable questions...no topic "angles"...just articles after articles...

I'm pretty sure anyone over the age of 6 could do that...Why bother?

You say "refute this", but put up multiples events!....What are we supposed to do???...Hunt down opposing positions for the next three hours in hopes that we find one that matches even ONE of yours????...And even if we did, your just gonna cry "partisan" anyway...

This whole thread reeks of you screaming... Well how about THIS?"...."Well what about THAT?"..."You didn't mention anything about THIS ONE!"...on & on ad nauseum...

The only difference between what you've done and my link is that you followed the forum rules and actually provided a link...

But the message behind it is still the same...

BTW - You know how much credibility someplace like AnnCoulter.com" would have if I used it as a source?....MediaMatters is much worse...

They even admit they target Conservatives in their "about" section...

They only thing more childish in a debate forum than using partisan sources is using photoshopped pictures....

So far you're 0-for-2...

If you refute any claims that I made then show your evidence!. That's debate. The Media Matters site has links to the people making the false claims and also documents the original quote. Whether you like that site or not is not the issue. Do they target conservatives? - yes. Does Rush, O'Reilly Coulter, Hannity et. al target liberals - of course.

I don't want to get into a pointless argument over whether it's important to point out the lies that I see. In a forum about media bias I think it is, apparently you don't.

As for photoshopped pictures, I think they are a fun way to emphasis a point. You could make the same argument for smilies.

Deegan · 11-09-05, 06:31 PM

“NAME THE LIBERAL HYPOCRITE” QUIZ
From Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles In Liberal Hypocrisy, by Peter Schweizer

Who says that conservatives are racist because they don’t support affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
a. Barbra Streisand
b. Michael Moore
c. Al Franken
d. All of the above
Answer: D. All of the above. Of the 112 people Franken has hired to work on his books, television projects and radio program, only one was black. Of the 135 individuals Michael Moore hired, only three were black. Barbra Streisand has hired 53 senior people to work on her film projects and only one was black.

Who says that corporations are “terrorists” and has said “I don’t own a single share of stock” but secretly owns shares in Pentagon contractors like Boeing, pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, and even Halliburton?
a. Barney Frank
b. Gloria Steinem
c. Michael Moore
Answer: C. Michael Moore. According to IRS records, Moore owns at least several hundred thousands of dollars in stock and has a broker, even though he has repeatedly claimed he doesn’t “own a single share of stock.”

Who says that Americans need to consume less to stave off ecological disaster, but spends $22,000 a year to water their lawn?
a. Hillary Clinton
b. Barbra Streisand
c. Rob Reiner
Answer: B. Barbra Streisand. The singer, who says that cutting back is the only way to protect the environment, lives alone with her husband on a compound with five homes and a 12,000 square foot air conditioned barn.

Who says the rich need to pay their fair share and favors the estate tax, but hides his own assets in numerous trusts, including one in the faraway Pacific island of Fiji?
a. George Soros
b. John Edwards
c. Ted Kennedy
Answer: C. Ted Kennedy. The Kennedys have transferred more than half a billion in money from generation to generation but according to their own records paid only $34,000 in estate taxes. Their largest asset, the Merchandise Mart real estate company, was in a trust domiciled in Fiji.

Who has proclaimed themselves a corporate activist but has made money by investing in companies they were protesting against?
a. REM’s Michael Stipe
b. Ralph Nader
c. Alec Baldwin
Answer: B. Ralph Nader. When Nader went after Firestone in the 1970s he made stock investments in Goodyear, their main competitor. When he campaigned for the breakup of Microsoft in 2000, he invested hundreds of thousands in other high-tech companies that stood to benefit.

hipsterdufus · 11-09-05, 07:29 PM

O'Reilly is always good for a lie, or in this case, an error of omission. Here's one of his for today:

Quote:

O'Reilly's Ridiculous Omission
On last night's O'Reilly Factor, the Bloviating Billster used his "Most Ridiculous item of the Day" segment to gloat about the falling circulation figures of what he termed the "left-wing" newspapers. In typical O'Reilly fashion, he neglected to tell his viewers the whole story.

O'REILLY: "Time now for the most ridiculous item of the day. The nation's newspapers continue to lose readership. Many of them deserve it. New circulation numbers say the biggest drops are happening at left-wing newspapers. The L. A. Times down another 4%. Houston Chronice 6% down. Boston Globe down 8%. Atlanta- Journal-Constitution down almost 9% and the San Francisco Chronicle down an astounding 17%. Now, our pals at the TampaTribune and St. Petersburg Times - we'll deal with the St. Petersburg Times again tomorrow - are also down. What's happening here is that the internet is much easier to access than a newspaper but also millions of traditional-thinking Americans have stopped bying the left-wing papers. All and all, unless the left-wing press becomes more fair and balanced, things will get even more more ridiculous. Bank on it."

COMMENT

The newspaper the right-wing loves to hate - the New York Times - actually saw a slight INCREASE in circulation of 0.46%. O'Reilly never told his viewers that.
Nor did he tell them that Murdoch-owned tabloid, the New York Post, lost 1.74% in circulation.

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/09/...ssion.php#more

hipsterdufus · 11-09-05, 07:31 PM

It's like shooting fish in a barrel with O'Reilly. Here's another lie from the same day.

Quote:

Bill O'Reilly: Muddled Master of Misdirection

O'Reilly Links Riots in France to Iraq War and French Refusal to Help Bush
"Well, if you don't believe in karma after this story, what can I say. Let's start at the beginning. If France had demanded that Saddam Hussein allow the U.N. weapons inspectors full access, there would not have been a war in Iraq. But as you know, France was making millions under the table by working with Saddam. And that corrupt bargain hurt us all. Also, let's not forget the Chirac government and the French media have consistently undermined America's War on Terror. That's why [The O'Reilly Factor is] boycotting France."

COMMENT: O'Reilly's exhibiting signs of mad FOX disease here, i.e. claiming that the U. N.inspectors did not have full access to Iraq, when in fact they did. The French actually favored permitting those inspectors to continue doing their job for several more months and opposed what they and other countries rightly perceived to be a misguided, unnecessary American misadventure in Iraq.

France was not the only country involved in the Oil-for-Food Scandal. Five U.S. companies and/or individuals have also been implicated. O'Reilly's statement here is simplistic at best and deliberately misleading at worst.

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/08/...ction.php#more

Deegan · 11-09-05, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipsterdufus

O'Reilly is always good for a lie, or in this case, an error of omission. Here's one of his for today:

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/09/...ssion.php#more

How is this a lie?

I don't think it's his duty to report if the NYTimes if is up or not, what he reported was truth, so please try and be true to your own thread. Oh.......and I noticed you totally ignored my post, any thought on that at all, just curious, LOL!

Deegan · 11-09-05, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipsterdufus

It's like shooting fish in a barrel with O'Reilly. Here's another lie from the same day.

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/08/...ction.php#more

Again, no lie was told, please sir/miss, be true to your own pitiful thread, it's the least you can do!