Page 21 of 30 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 300

Thread: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

  1. #201
    Sage
    jackalope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-14 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,494

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Keep in mind, too, that on this, the burden of proof is not "beyond a reasonable doubt." It may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but it's probably a preponderance of the evidence -- that is, "more likely than not."

    The burden of proof for media reporting on public figures is quite high.

  2. #202
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    12-02-09 @ 05:13 PM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,695

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    I find it very interesting that the right defends Rush, a simple entertainer, with the same veracity as they do Dick Cheney.

  3. #203
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    i still haven't seen or heard exactly what sharpton or jackson said. never the less, rush's partner dropped him.

    i have every doubt that roger g. would have wanted rush as an owner anyway. the nfl doesn't need his controversy OR his money.
    Got a source to back this up?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #204
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    The burden of proof for media reporting on public figures is quite high.
    It's factually difficult to do, but that's different from a standard of proof.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  5. #205
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Got a source to back this up?
    to back what up? that the nfl doesn't need controversy? lmao!

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  6. #206
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    to back what up? that the nfl doesn't need controversy? lmao!
    Evading the question I see.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  7. #207
    Sage
    jackalope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-14 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,494

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    It's factually difficult to do, but that's different from a standard of proof.

    Actually, as has been discussed in this thread, the actual burden of proof is higher on cases involving media reporting on public figures. It is lower on private citizens. With respect to public figures, malice must be proved, in addition to the statments being false, and the media company knowing it was false or having reckless disregard for the truth.

    This higher burden of proof was imposed by the Supreme Court in a separate case than the one that imposed the burden of proof on the plaintiff.

  8. #208
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    Actually, as has been discussed in this thread, the actual burden of proof is higher on cases involving media reporting on public figures. It is lower on private citizens. With respect to public figures, malice must be proved, in addition to the statments being false, and the media company knowing it was false or having reckless disregard for the truth.

    This higher burden of proof was imposed by the Supreme Court in a separate case than the one that imposed the burden of proof on the plaintiff.
    You keep seeming to be mixing up information.

    You keep stating one thing that most have acknowledged true and trying to use that as acknowledgement that the other thing people don't agree with you on is true.

    Yes, the standard of what they must show is higher....ie they must show intent, damage, etc.

    However..

    One, that has nothing to do with "reasonable doubt" or other sorts of standards of measured certainty in regards to proof

    Two, just because it requires MORE things does not necessarily the standard for the amount of proof any individual item neds changes

    Three, I've still seen zero evidence that Limbaugh must somehow concretely prove he never said something.

  9. #209
    Sage
    jackalope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-14 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,494

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You keep seeming to be mixing up information.

    You keep stating one thing that most have acknowledged true and trying to use that as acknowledgement that the other thing people don't agree with you on is true.

    Yes, the standard of what they must show is higher....ie they must show intent, damage, etc.

    However..

    One, that has nothing to do with "reasonable doubt" or other sorts of standards of measured certainty in regards to proof

    Two, just because it requires MORE things does not necessarily the standard for the amount of proof any individual item neds changes

    Three, I've still seen zero evidence that Limbaugh must somehow concretely prove he never said something.

    The quote to which I originally responded referred to burden of proof. Harshaw switched it up to standard of proof in his last post, but that was his mistake. The discussion, was about burden of proof.
    Last edited by jackalope; 10-16-09 at 04:06 PM.

  10. #210
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,326

    Re: Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    Actually, as has been discussed in this thread, the actual burden of proof is higher on cases involving media reporting on public figures. It is lower on private citizens. With respect to public figures, malice must be proved, in addition to the statments being false, and the media company knowing it was false or having reckless disregard for the truth.

    This higher burden of proof was imposed by the Supreme Court in a separate case than the one that imposed the burden of proof on the plaintiff.

    I believe you have this in terms of several sources on the news repeating false accusations, and then when called on them, reverting to the meme of well, that may not be true, but he (Limbaugh) has said other things......

    Yeah, like what? They (Sanchez/CNN) were busted telling a lie, then moved it to gross generalization that still was designed to smear.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 21 of 30 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •