PDA

View Full Version : AP States Audience boos as Bush offers best wishes for Clinton's recovery


Pages : [1] 2

jAZ
09-03-2004, 01:43 PM
The GOP Zell-ots are out in force...
Classy crowd, classy President. :shake:

You guys here deserve props for not acting this (seriously).

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/03/audience_boos_as_bush_offers_best_wishes_for_clintons_recovery/

WEST ALLIS, Wis. --President Bush on Friday wished Bill Clinton ''best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

''He's is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally.

Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.

Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.

Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and ''the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president.''

Baby Lee
09-03-2004, 01:45 PM
Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.
In a related story, I just took a massive dump. . . . Again, Bush did nothing to stop me.

Saulbadguy
09-03-2004, 01:46 PM
In a related story, I just took a massive dump. . . . Again, Bush did nothing to stop me.
WMD?

Jenson71
09-03-2004, 01:47 PM
What a bunch of pricks.

Cochise
09-03-2004, 01:50 PM
I would be interested to see a clip and hear how prevalent the boos were, or the context in which Clinton was mentioned.

Obviously, that is classless, but I have a hard time believing it was a majority of the people there. And what exactly was Bush going to do to stop them?

No more classless to boo someone who's ill than it is to beat some cop unconcious during a Bush protest or walk around with pictures of the President eating fetuses and dressed in Nazi garb, carrying signs that say you support the troops when they shoot their officers, firing shots through the windows of Republican campaign offices, or other such nonsense coming from the loony left.

There are brain donors on either side of the aisle.

Brock
09-03-2004, 01:51 PM
Hilarious coming from left wingers.

tk13
09-03-2004, 01:52 PM
Bah... yes, only the Democrats have the hate within them... that's it, that's what everyone here says.... what a load of crap. Doesn't surprise me I guess, health, people, and the good of the country often come in behind backing your political party these days I guess....

And I forget I have to do it on this board, I'm not sympathizing with any freaking nut job left wingers... I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of all those who say the Democrats are the party that's full of hate. Get over it.

KCWolfman
09-03-2004, 02:05 PM
I think I will wait for another article substantiating the claim. This article actually thought it was news that Bush did not acknowledge the "boos" that occurred.

KCWolfman
09-03-2004, 02:05 PM
In a related story, I just took a massive dump. . . . Again, Bush did nothing to stop me.
Dammit, much better than mine.

FringeNC
09-03-2004, 02:06 PM
Did the crowd know the details of Clinton's health?

KCTitus
09-03-2004, 02:16 PM
Im pretty sure the crowd was just booing Bush...

Saulbadguy
09-03-2004, 02:16 PM
I'm guessing they were alerted of the final score of the Chiefs-Cowboys game.

siberian khatru
09-03-2004, 02:17 PM
http://spinswimming.blogspot.com/2004/09/ap-bias-strikes-again.html

Friday, September 03, 2004
AP Bias strikes again
The AP are really showing their bias again, except this time, they have been caught in the act.

Sharp eyed posters over at Free Republic spotted this story about the president's reaction to news of Bill Clinton's upcoming surgery:

WEST ALLIS, Wis. - President Bush (news - web sites) on Friday wished Bill Clinton (news - web sites) "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."
"He's is in our thoughts and prayers," Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


Needless to say, there was massive outrage. Many on the thread had heard the speech live and heard no boos at all and were screaming liberal media bias...and rightfully so. Others e-mailed the AP to express their displeasure. So, minutes later, a new version gets posted to the same yahoo link and another thread pops up on Free Republic:

WEST ALLIS, Wis. - President Bush (news - web sites) on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton (news - web sites), who faces heart bypass surgery, "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."
"He's is in our thoughts and prayers," Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


Of course, someone with access to the raw wire posted this as well to archive this monumental, and perhaps intentional screw up.

BC-Bush-Clinton, 1st Ld-Writethru,150 Bush offers best wishes for Clinton's recovery
Eds: SUBS lead to include reference to surgery. DELETES 3rd graf previous, Bush's audience, because of uncertainty about crowd reaction.
WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton, who faces heart bypass surgery, "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."
"He's is in our thoughts and prayers," Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


Someone at the Associated Press has some major explaining to do.

Mr. Kotter
09-03-2004, 02:18 PM
I think I will wait for another article substantiating the claim. This article actually thought it was news that Bush did not acknowledge the "boos" that occurred.

I'm with Russ....but if it really happened, that's sad. :huh:

Mr. Kotter
09-03-2004, 02:21 PM
http://spinswimming.blogspot.com/2004/09/ap-bias-strikes-again.html

Friday, September 03, 2004
AP Bias strikes again
The AP are really showing their bias again, except this time, they have been caught in the act.

Sharp eyed posters over at Free Republic spotted this story about the president's reaction to news of Bill Clinton's upcoming surgery:

WEST ALLIS, Wis. - President Bush (news - web sites) on Friday wished Bill Clinton (news - web sites) "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."
"He's is in our thoughts and prayers," Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


Needless to say, there was massive outrage. Many on the thread had heard the speech live and heard no boos at all and were screaming liberal media bias...and rightfully so. Others e-mailed the AP to express their displeasure. So, minutes later, a new version gets posted to the same yahoo link and another thread pops up on Free Republic:

WEST ALLIS, Wis. - President Bush (news - web sites) on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton (news - web sites), who faces heart bypass surgery, "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."
"He's is in our thoughts and prayers," Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


Of course, someone with access to the raw wire posted this as well to archive this monumental, and perhaps intentional screw up.

BC-Bush-Clinton, 1st Ld-Writethru,150 Bush offers best wishes for Clinton's recovery
Eds: SUBS lead to include reference to surgery. DELETES 3rd graf previous, Bush's audience, because of uncertainty about crowd reaction.
WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton, who faces heart bypass surgery, "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."
"He's is in our thoughts and prayers," Bush said at a campaign rally.
Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.
Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


Someone at the Associated Press has some major explaining to do.

So friggin' TYPICAL.... :cuss:

And the Left wonders why the "media" is accused of liberal bias..... :shake:

alpha_omega
09-03-2004, 02:21 PM
Hilarious coming from left wingers.

Exactly!

FringeNC
09-03-2004, 02:22 PM
So friggin' TYPICAL.... :cuss:

And the Left wonders why the "media" is accused of liberal bias..... :shake:

WOW! The blogosphere is denying big media the ability to tell lies.

Cochise
09-03-2004, 02:25 PM
WOW! The blogosphere is denying big media the ability to tell lies.

Man, this is why the 'new media' is so great.

The AP gets caught with their cranks in the mashed potatos of public opinion, and tries to cover their tracks, but they're busted.

What else is new :shake:

jAZ
09-03-2004, 02:27 PM
So friggin' TYPICAL.... :cuss:

And the Left wonders why the "media" is accused of liberal bias..... :shake:
AP covers up the Boo's and you call it a "liberal media"?

:shake:

FringeNC
09-03-2004, 02:28 PM
Man, this is why the 'new media' is so great.

The AP gets caught with their cranks in the mashed potatos of public opinion, and tries to cover their tracks, but they're busted.

What else is new :shake:

What's sKerry is that Kerry may have been able to win this thing if not for the fact-checking of bloggers.

Cochise
09-03-2004, 02:28 PM
AP covers up the Boo's and you call it a "liberal media"?

:shake:

uhh.. you should probably read the post he was replying to. :doh!:

jAZ
09-03-2004, 02:34 PM
uhh.. you should probably read the post he was replying to. :doh!:
I read it.

AP pulls the part of the story unflattering to Bush because of pressure from Freepers, and you guys still think the media is liberal.

:shake:

Donger
09-03-2004, 02:36 PM
I read it.

AP pulls the part of the story unflattering to Bush because of Pressure from a Freeper website, and you guys still think the media is liberal.

:shake:

Man, you are more and more bizarre with each passing day...

You actually find it more likely that AP changed their story because of Freeper pressure, as opposed to the possibility that they got caught making something up that cast a negative light on Bush?

Cochise
09-03-2004, 02:36 PM
I read it.

AP pulls the part of the story unflattering to Bush because of Pressure from a Freeper website, and you guys still think the media is liberal.

:shake:

Uhh... no... I think the reason for that was that something was originally put into the article that was apparently false or grossly exagerrated, and pulled after they were called on it.

Is there anything you won't spin?

jAZ
09-03-2004, 02:39 PM
Man, you are more and more bizarre with each passing day...

You actually find it more likely that AP changed their story because of Freeper pressure, as opposed to the possibility that they got caught making something up that cast a negative light on Bush?
Hell, even the Freepers admit it was because of their pressure. You are just making stuff up about AP fabricating anything.

Donger
09-03-2004, 02:42 PM
Hell, even the Freepers admit it was because of their pressure. You are just making stuff up about AP fabricating anything.

Freeper pressure to remove something which didn't happen, yes.

Chief Henry
09-03-2004, 02:43 PM
I watched the clip and I did not HEAR ANY Boo's.
That AP reporter is playing partisian politics.
It figures...

jAZ
09-03-2004, 02:45 PM
Freeper pressure to remove something which didn't happen, yes.
You were there?

Cochise
09-03-2004, 02:46 PM
I watched the clip and I did not HEAR ANY Boo's.
That AP reporter is playing partisian politics.
It figures...

Where can I see the clip?

Saulbadguy
09-03-2004, 02:47 PM
I watched the clip and I did not HEAR ANY Boo's.
That AP reporter is playing partisian politics.
It figures...
It helps if you un-mute the television.

Donger
09-03-2004, 02:48 PM
Hell, even the Freepers admit it was because of their pressure. You are just making stuff up about AP fabricating anything.

Will a videotape (with audio) of the event that clearly details that there was no booing convince you that AP fabricated the booing part?

Cochise
09-03-2004, 02:51 PM
Will a videotape (with audio) of the event that clearly details that there was no booing convince you that AP fabricated the booing part?

Obviously the tape has been doctored :rolleyes:

Chief Henry
09-03-2004, 02:52 PM
Where can I see the clip?

I saw it on Fox News about 12:40pm this afternoon.
No way in hell were their any boo's.

Joe Seahawk
09-03-2004, 02:53 PM
If the AP made this up it is just shameless!

Cochise
09-03-2004, 02:54 PM
I saw it on Fox News about 12:40pm this afternoon.
No way in hell were their any boo's.

:hmmm:

Still at work though... no TV :cuss:

Chief Henry
09-03-2004, 02:55 PM
It helps if you un-mute the television.


:stupid: your desperate

Donger
09-03-2004, 02:59 PM
Audio link here: http://tinyurl.com/6yfug

jAZ
09-03-2004, 02:59 PM
Will a videotape (with audio) of the event that clearly details that there was no booing convince you that AP fabricated the booing part?
Probably, but we all know what happened with Howard Dean's scream. A lack of crowd noise in a video doesn't mean crowd noise didn't happen.

Donger
09-03-2004, 03:00 PM
Probably, but we all know what happened with Howard Dean's scream. A lack of crowd noise in a video doesn't mean crowd noise didn't happen.

Listen to the link on 37

penguinz
09-03-2004, 03:02 PM
i am sorry jAZ but you are the blindest person i have encoutered today.

RINGLEADER
09-03-2004, 03:03 PM
I read it.

AP pulls the part of the story unflattering to Bush because of pressure from Freepers, and you guys still think the media is liberal.

:shake:


Did you hear what Bush said Jaz? Did you hear the boos?

RINGLEADER
09-03-2004, 03:07 PM
Let's review the logic...

AP says there were boos.
Tape shows there were no boos.
AP changes their previously erroneous story.
Jaz blames Freepers and Says Howard Dean proves there could have been boos.

Face it Jaz, this is just another in a long string of stories you've posted lately that are factually inaccurate.

Cochise
09-03-2004, 03:07 PM
Audio link here: http://tinyurl.com/6yfug

Holy crap.

After hearing the clip, there was seemingly unanimous applause and I could not detect a single boo.

That AP article has officially vaulted into the media bias hall of fame.

And jAZ into the delusion hall of fame.

Donger
09-03-2004, 03:08 PM
Did you hear what Bush said Jaz? Did you hear the boos?

I'm sure that jAZ is reviewing the audio posted on 37 as we speak.

RINGLEADER
09-03-2004, 03:08 PM
I just listened to the audio from the event...Jaz was right - I do hear boos. They just sound like cheers and clapping...

jAZ
09-03-2004, 03:11 PM
Audio link here: http://tinyurl.com/6yfug
Damnit... why did you have to post something from Fox. I'm really trying here.

Cochise
09-03-2004, 03:14 PM
Damnit... why did you have to post something from Fox. I'm really trying here.

:clap: :clap: I called my shot! (back in post #32) He's implying that FNC doctored the audio.

So predictable. :LOL:

headsnap
09-03-2004, 03:14 PM
Damnit... why did you have to post something from Fox. I'm really trying here.
are you implying that FOX doctored the audio? :spock:

jAZ
09-03-2004, 03:14 PM
Face it Jaz, this is just another in a long string of stories you've posted lately that are factually inaccurate.
So sayth the king.

Donger
09-03-2004, 03:18 PM
Damnit... why did you have to post something from Fox. I'm really trying here.

Because any reasonable person would accept it. Sorry, I forgot who I was dealing with.

Perhaps you'd be kind enough to provide a list of acceptable sources, and I'll do my best to get them for your kind perusal and consideration?

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 03:18 PM
Audio link here: http://tinyurl.com/6yfug


Boo's? What boo's? What idiot wrote the article jaz posted? They should be fired.

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 03:20 PM
Boo's? What boo's? What idiot wrote the article jaz posted? They should be fired.


I take that back. The writer didn't say it. jaz is just making up more lies.

Joe Seahawk
09-03-2004, 03:24 PM
I take that back. The writer didn't say it. jaz is just making up more lies.

In Jaz's defense, the article really did say there were boo's when Jaz posted it.. But the AP got busted making stuff up so all the papers had to retract their original story..

jAZ
09-03-2004, 03:25 PM
Because any reasonable person would accept it. Sorry, I forgot who I was dealing with.

Perhaps you'd be kind enough to provide a list of acceptable sources, and I'll do my best to get them for your kind perusal and consideration?
Never forget who you are dealing with. ;)

Cochise
09-03-2004, 03:27 PM
In Jaz's defense, the article really did say there were boo's when Jaz posted it.. But the AP got busted making stuff up so all the papers had to retract their original story..

Well it's not really that, it's that even after the AP retracted their orginal story jAZ was here implying that it was true, and that the AP had caved to pressure from a right-leaning internet message board, and apparently he was making this implication without ever having listened to the tape himself. :doh!:

This is eerily reminiscent of yesterday, when Crankie made a thread about Arnold lying, without bothering to look up the actual quote.

Joe Seahawk
09-03-2004, 03:27 PM
Here is a Screen capture of the original.. Shameless :shake:


http://www.hosting-hub.com/filedeposit/uploads/03092004/Audience%20boos%20%202.png

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 03:27 PM
In Jaz's defense, the article really did say there were boo's when Jaz posted it.. But the AP got busted making stuff up so all the papers had to retract their original story..


No shit? Really? That's BS. Why does it surprise me?

Sorry about the making stuff up part, jaz. I guessed a liberal did it; I just guessed the wrong one.

Joe Seahawk
09-03-2004, 03:28 PM
Well it's not really that, it's that even after the AP retracted their orginal story jAZ was here implying that it was true, and that the AP had caved to pressure from a right-leaning internet message board, and apparently he was making this implication without ever having listened to the tape himself. :doh!:

Well, then Jaz is beyond reason.. :p

Donger
09-03-2004, 03:28 PM
Never forget who you are dealing with. ;)

So, where's the list of acceptable sources?

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 03:32 PM
Sadly, the most pathetic thing about all of this is not the false story, it's Justin and Saul's straight up denial of the facts.

Can you say "pathetic"?

jAZ
09-03-2004, 03:32 PM
So, where's the list of acceptable sources?
Look nothing is on the banned list of sources... but lots of things are on the skepicism list. Fox News, NewsMax, RushLimbaugh.com...

There are counter sources that you should also be skeptical of... Salon.com being one of the major ones.

Donger
09-03-2004, 03:33 PM
Look nothing is on the banned list of sources... but lots of things are on the skepicism list. Fox News, NewsMax, RushLimbaugh.com...

There are counter sources that you should also be skeptical of... Salon.com being one of the major ones.

So, what's the non-skepticism list?

Cochise
09-03-2004, 03:38 PM
Look nothing is on the banned list of sources... but lots of things are on the skepicism list. Fox News, NewsMax, RushLimbaugh.com...

There are counter sources that you should also be skeptical of... Salon.com being one of the major ones.

Well, if the Fox News audio is doctored as you were implying, perhaps you can provide us with a link to the "real" audio from a non-skepticism list source?

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 03:39 PM
Look nothing is on the banned list of sources... but lots of things are on the skepicism list. Fox News, NewsMax, RushLimbaugh.com...

There are counter sources that you should also be skeptical of... Salon.com being one of the major ones.


You forgot the AP, jr.

Excuse me but Fox is just as trust worthy as CNN, or any other major news network. You just don't like them because they don't spout your rhetoric like the other networks do.

Donger
09-03-2004, 03:42 PM
Geez, what a shock!

The AP video from the event is missing from Yahoo's video service...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=index2&cid=1033

jAZ
09-03-2004, 03:53 PM
You forgot the AP, jr.

Excuse me but Fox is just as trust worthy as CNN
That's about right.

Baby Lee
09-03-2004, 03:57 PM
With this incident, and Frankie's outlandish take yesterday, is it any wonder we don't see the 'truth' you see on other, more complex, issues?

jAZ
09-03-2004, 04:03 PM
With this incident, and Frankie's outlandish take yesterday, is it any wonder we don't see the 'truth' you see on other, more complex, issues?
Huh?

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 04:24 PM
Huh?


You have no credibility because you are a partisan 'tard.

jAZ
09-03-2004, 04:33 PM
You have no credibility because you are a partisan 'tard.
Maybe, but it has nothing to do with this thread as Baby Lee wants to suggest.

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 04:51 PM
Maybe, but it has nothing to do with this thread as Baby Lee wants to suggest.


I was merely explaining what he said. I cannot explain his motives for saying it..... Well, not all of them anyway. :)

jAZ
09-03-2004, 05:17 PM
It's been revised again... now its reported as "ooohs".

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/09/03/politics1354EDT0608.DTL

Bush Offers Best Wishes for Clinton

Friday September 3, 2004 11:16 PM

WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton, who faces heart bypass surgery, ``best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

``He is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally in Wisconsin.

The crowd reacted with applause and with some ``ooohs,'' apparently surprised by the news that Clinton was ill.

Later, aboard Air Force One, Bush called Clinton to express his concern for his heart problems, according to presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.

The president told Clinton that he and the first lady were praying for him and wished him a ``speedy recovery,'' McClellan said.

Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.

Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and ``the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president.''

LVNHACK
09-03-2004, 05:18 PM
You have no credibility because you are a partisan 'tard.




Jamie............I'm ashamed of you.........How harsh............

LVNHACK
09-03-2004, 05:20 PM
It's been revised again... now its reported as "ooohs".

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/09/03/politics1354EDT0608.DTL

Bush Offers Best Wishes for Clinton

Friday September 3, 2004 11:16 PM

WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton, who faces heart bypass surgery, ``best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

``He is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally in Wisconsin.

The crowd reacted with applause and with some ``ooohs,'' apparently surprised by the news that Clinton was ill.

Later, aboard Air Force One, Bush called Clinton to express his concern for his heart problems, according to presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.

The president told Clinton that he and the first lady were praying for him and wished him a ``speedy recovery,'' McClellan said.

Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.

Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and ``the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president.''


I just saw the clip........I heard claping, nothing else....

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 05:29 PM
Jamie............I'm ashamed of you.........How harsh............


I learned it from you and frazod.

LVNHACK
09-03-2004, 05:32 PM
I learned it from you and frazod.




Not me.......I'd have said partisan fuggin retard, that has penis breath........ ;)

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 05:32 PM
It's been revised again... now its reported as "ooohs".

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/09/03/politics1354EDT0608.DTL

Bush Offers Best Wishes for Clinton

Friday September 3, 2004 11:16 PM

WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton, who faces heart bypass surgery, ``best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

``He is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally in Wisconsin.

The crowd reacted with applause and with some ``ooohs,'' apparently surprised by the news that Clinton was ill.

Later, aboard Air Force One, Bush called Clinton to express his concern for his heart problems, according to presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.

The president told Clinton that he and the first lady were praying for him and wished him a ``speedy recovery,'' McClellan said.

Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.

Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and ``the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president.''


Bullshit. NBC showed the clip and there were no boos or oohs.

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 05:37 PM
Not me.......I'd have said partisan fuggin retard, that has penis breath........ ;)


This is why I am the pupil, and you are the teacher. :wayne:

Donger
09-03-2004, 05:39 PM
Bullshit. NBC showed the clip and there were no boos or oohs.

Nope. There was a distinct noise, however, before the collective applause at Bush's words. It sounded like (as you'd expect) people inhaling in surprise/shock at the news.

No boos.

AP got caught making a naughty, period.

headsnap
09-03-2004, 05:39 PM
Bullshit. NBC showed the clip and there were no boos or oohs.
listening to the audio, I hear only oh's, not oohs or boos.

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 05:47 PM
Nope. There was a distinct noise, however, before the collective applause at Bush's words. It sounded like (as you'd expect) people inhaling in surprise/shock at the news.

No boos.

AP got caught making a naughty, period.


listening to the audio, I hear only oh's, not oohs or boos.



Yes, there was nothing negative about any of the noise (vocal or the applauding). It was all supportive.

I'm waiting on a correction from Justin for his first two lines of the topic header. I wouldn't normally care as it was not his fualt that the AP lied, but his persistence in ignoring the facts because he wanted to believe what he typed pissed me off just a little. And any reasonable person would make a correction/apology after something like that with out prodding.

I do realize that I will probably be waiting a very long time, unless Justin surprises me....

Donger
09-03-2004, 05:48 PM
That's about right.

Still waiting on the non-skepticism list, jAZ...

How about CNN?
AP?

Cochise
09-03-2004, 05:49 PM
There won't be a correction.

Maybe if he had just posted the article. But after the dogged way he blamed the retraction on a vast right-wing internet forum conspiracy that brought down the mighty Associated Press, there won't be a retraction. Just more waffling than Aunt Jemima.

Donger
09-03-2004, 05:50 PM
And any reasonable person would make a correction/apology after something like that with out prodding.

I do realize that I will probably be waiting a very long time, unless Justin surprises me....

See 54. He already admits that he is unreasonable.

Unless he miraculously grows a pair of balls soon, I doubt he'll admit that he was wrong.

RINGLEADER
09-03-2004, 06:05 PM
It's been revised again... now its reported as "ooohs".

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/09/03/politics1354EDT0608.DTL

Bush Offers Best Wishes for Clinton

Friday September 3, 2004 11:16 PM

WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) - President Bush on Friday offered former President Bill Clinton, who faces heart bypass surgery, ``best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

``He is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally in Wisconsin.

The crowd reacted with applause and with some ``ooohs,'' apparently surprised by the news that Clinton was ill.

Later, aboard Air Force One, Bush called Clinton to express his concern for his heart problems, according to presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.

The president told Clinton that he and the first lady were praying for him and wished him a ``speedy recovery,'' McClellan said.

Bush offered his wishes while campaigning one day after accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in New York. Clinton was hospitalized in New York after complaining of mild chest pain and shortness of breath.

Bush recently praised Clinton when the former president went to the White House for the unveiling of his official portrait. He lauded Clinton for his knowledge, compassion and ``the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president.''


Oh man, they just keep digging and digging and digging...

RINGLEADER
09-03-2004, 06:06 PM
They're not booing, they're saying BOO-urns, BOO-urns...

Cochise
09-03-2004, 07:38 PM
They're not booing, they're saying BOO-urns, BOO-urns...

ROFL ROFL ROFL rep!! :LOL: :homer:

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 08:00 PM
Gosh, what will this party do if they lost their heart with Wellstone and their soul with Clinton.

:eek: I pray for his recovery. If Kerry loses big we will need the Clintons around to clean up the mess...

Brock
09-03-2004, 08:14 PM
Liberal media BS. How typical of a dumb fish like jaz to be hooked like that.

2bikemike
09-03-2004, 08:36 PM
Yes, there was nothing negative about any of the noise (vocal or the applauding). It was all supportive.

I'm waiting on a correction from Justin for his first two lines of the topic header. I wouldn't normally care as it was not his fualt that the AP lied, but his persistence in ignoring the facts because he wanted to believe what he typed pissed me off just a little. And any reasonable person would make a correction/apology after something like that with out prodding.

I do realize that I will probably be waiting a very long time, unless Justin surprises me....

Jaz lied! Jaz lied! It doesn't matter the source of the mis-information. At least that is what I have been hearing the past few months.

trndobrd
09-03-2004, 08:46 PM
Jaz lied! Jaz lied! It doesn't matter the source of the mis-information. At least that is what I have been hearing the past few months.


:LOL:

rep

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 09:00 PM
Jaz lied! Jaz lied! It doesn't matter the source of the mis-information. At least that is what I have been hearing the past few months.


Worthy of much more than a rep. But it's all I have to give. :thumb:

FringeNC
09-03-2004, 09:33 PM
Just listened to the audio. There is no way in hell the reporter could have made an honest mistake. AP = American Pravda. Even Dems should be disgusted with this bogus smear attempt by the media.

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 09:56 PM
Just listened to the audio. There is no way in hell the reporter could have made an honest mistake. AP = American Pravda. Even Dems should be disgusted with this bogus smear attempt by the media.


You’re kidding, right? :D

The left have built a party that argues with bogus smears.

Joe Seahawk
09-03-2004, 10:18 PM
This is a good read..As usual Hinderaker nails it..

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007712.php

FringeNC
09-03-2004, 10:28 PM
This is a good read..As usual Hinderaker nails it..

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007712.php

Yep. That's where I downloaded the mp3. He's right. This is scandal.

Joe Seahawk
09-03-2004, 10:43 PM
I think this topic should be modified since it has been proven false, even the link provided by Jaz doesn't support what he wrote..

This is a good chance for Jaz to show some class by correcting the title and thread starter.

Duck Dog
09-03-2004, 10:51 PM
I think this topic should be modified since it has been proven false, even the link provided by Jaz doesn't support what he wrote..

This is a good chance for Jaz to show some class by correcting the title and thread starter.


Ha, good luck Joe. So far, even the dirt bags that wrote, edited and printed it won't admit jack shiat.

You don't think jaz will bend before ethey do, do ya? ;)

OldTownChief
09-03-2004, 11:01 PM
I think this topic should be modified since it has been proven false, even the link provided by Jaz doesn't support what he wrote..

This is a good chance for Jaz to show some class by correcting the title and thread starter.

I'll second that:thumb:

Raiderhader
09-03-2004, 11:49 PM
Jaz lied! Jaz lied! It doesn't matter the source of the mis-information. At least that is what I have been hearing the past few months.


ROFL :thumb:

mlyonsd
09-04-2004, 07:24 AM
Well maybe that fat pig super sized big mac POS shouldn't have lied under oath.

I have no respect for the guy but don't want to see him croak. I want him to be here when Hillary gets pounded by Guiliani in 2008.

Mr. Kotter
09-04-2004, 08:44 AM
There won't be a correction.

Maybe if he had just posted the article. But after the dogged way he blamed the retraction on a vast right-wing internet forum conspiracy that brought down the mighty Associated Press, there won't be a retraction. Just more waffling than Aunt Jemima.

Yep, yep, yep.... :p

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 08:48 AM
I read it.

AP pulls the part of the story unflattering to Bush because of pressure from Freepers, and you guys still think the media is liberal.

:shake:
Did you use to write for Pravda?

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 08:48 AM
You were there?
You were?

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 08:50 AM
Probably, but we all know what happened with Howard Dean's scream. A lack of crowd noise in a video doesn't mean crowd noise didn't happen.
I heard crowd noise, just no boos.

Perhaps Michael Moore now works for the AP? After all, he is well aware of false condemnation and mis-hearing Boos all the time.

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 08:56 AM
And when confronted with the issue and asked to produce his own legitimate sound source, the snake quietly retreats to his cave to create yet another story.



BTW - Whomever called jAZ a LIAR due to his decision to post poor intel gets rep. I also notice the usual suspects have left jAZ out to dry by himself on this one - so much for party support.

Nicely done, gentlemen.

Donger
09-04-2004, 09:10 AM
And when confronted with the issue and asked to produce his own legitimate sound source, the snake quietly retreats to his cave to create yet another story.



BTW - Whomever called jAZ a LIAR due to his decision to post poor intel gets rep. I also notice the usual suspects have left jAZ out to dry by himself on this one - so much for party support.

Nicely done, gentlemen.

I'm still waiting for a list of "non-skepticism" sources from jAZ. Perhaps he's compiling it as we type?

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 09:17 AM
I'm still waiting for a list of "non-skepticism" sources from jAZ. Perhaps he's compiling it as we type?
If compiling means skulking and ferreting out more "stories" to attack the character of the POTUS and anyone who supports him then, yes, you are probably right.

Cochise
09-04-2004, 09:46 AM
Yeah, I wish I could further rep Donger and the others who wouldn't let him get away with this garbage.

yoswif
09-04-2004, 10:01 AM
Thank you AP. Now the SwiftVets can claim they have as much credibility as the Associated Press.

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 10:04 AM
Yeah, I wish I could further rep Donger and the others who wouldn't let him get away with this garbage.
Done for you

Mr. Kotter
09-04-2004, 10:44 AM
Rep to the Mod who corrected the TITLE of this thread.... ROFL

Mr. Kotter
09-04-2004, 10:45 AM
Yeah, I wish I could further rep Donger and the others who wouldn't let him get away with this garbage.

What, what....no love for me? I was one of the first to call him on it.... :harumph:

:p

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 10:50 AM
What, what....no love for me? I was one of the first to call him on it.... :harumph:

:p
done

KCWolfman
09-04-2004, 10:50 AM
Rep to the Mod who corrected the TITLE of this thread.... ROFL
hehe. That is funny. I hadn't noticed until you pointed it out.

Joe Seahawk
09-04-2004, 12:45 PM
Thank you to whoever fixed the title.. :thumb: So far (other than this fine forum) I've only seen one media source properly retract.

click below.


http://wcco.com/water/local_story_248102910.html

Joe Seahawk
09-04-2004, 11:26 PM
AP finally issues a statement on the wire that says:

"This is a correction to an incorrect story posted by AP on Friday stating the crowd booed the President when he sent his good wishes. The crowd, in fact, did NOT boo."
A transcript of Bush's remarks released by the White House noted applause after Bush offered Clinton "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."

Nice try ****sticks..

Mr. Kotter
09-04-2004, 11:39 PM
done
:thumb:

RINGLEADER
09-05-2004, 12:10 AM
AP finally issues a statement on the wire that says:


Nice try ****sticks..


You know what's really cheesy about what the AP did is they didn't even bother to try to explain the second part of their lie...the "Bush did nothing to stop them" part. If all it was to begin with were "oohs" then why did the original writer feel it necessary to opine that Bush should have stopped them?

Like Kerry on Cambodia the AP won't be able to dig themselves out of this one.

Cochise
09-05-2004, 01:14 AM
:thumb:

Cochise? You gonna snub me? :hmmm:

Sorry brother, sometimes a man has just got to leave the house for a couple hours :banghead: ROFL

Joe Seahawk
09-05-2004, 01:15 AM
This is the kind of stuff that really gets under my skin.. A major media source blatantly trying to feed BS to the public to harm a sitting President in an election year.. :shake: that's F'd up..

No wonder FOX is getting such good ratings..

Cochise
09-05-2004, 01:15 AM
You know what's really cheesy about what the AP did is they didn't even bother to try to explain the second part of their lie...the "Bush did nothing to stop them" part. If all it was to begin with were "oohs" then why did the original writer feel it necessary to opine that Bush should have stopped them?

No kidding.

He did nothing to stop the "oohs". It sounded like a damn fireworks display! Damnit Bush! :cuss:

KCWolfman
09-05-2004, 08:20 AM
No wonder FOX is getting such good ratings..

I am surprised jAZ of all people has not complained about this. After all, he was the one carping daily on Fox's blatantly biased presentation.

And Frankie, UDuck, and Dehnise should be right along side him complaining as they frequently say the same thing about a legitimate news agency deliberately reporting false statements.

I wonder why none of the above have complained this time? Can anyone help me? What is the difference that they have lost their moral outrage?

Cochise
09-05-2004, 10:09 AM
A major media source blatantly trying to feed BS to the public to harm a sitting President in an election year..

It is absolutely, irrefutably obvious that the AP actively invented this false information and reported it as fact in an effort to influence the election.

Given the original wording, there can be no mistake about what was happening. The AP has been caught red-handed carrying a hatchet for the Kerry campaign.

Their Frankie-like retraction means nothing. This is the most obvious case of liberal media bias that I or anyone I saw discussing it on TV or around the web can ever remember seeing.

And the liberal ostriches around here continue to deny that the media is biased :shake: :rolleyes:

Phobia
09-05-2004, 10:13 AM
I am surprised jAZ of all people has not complained about this.

jAZ just tried to spin the whole thing. I don't have time to read that kind of stupid shit. I don't care if somebody spins something in their favor, but when it is irrepairable, move on. Don't sit there and offer up futile spin.

Off to iggy for the dumbass jAZ. Nice work, Justin - dipshitocrat.

jAZ
09-05-2004, 10:33 AM
Given the original wording, there can be no mistake about what was happening. The AP has been caught red-handed carrying a hatchet for the Kerry campaign.
You guys crack me up.

At best its an accurate account and the AP is caving to Freeper or Bush administration pressure on the story.

Most likely its a inadvertantly mistaken reporter who heared "oohs" and took them to be boos. And AP assumed it was a mistake and removed it to be safe.

At worst it's lie by a reporter and AP caught the "lie" and revised the story appropriately.

In either case, the AP acted professionally by reversing their original article. There's no way that this is the AP "carrying a hatchet for the Kerry campaign".

If it was, they wouldn't have willingly reversed it. It's not like this story was all over the news and embarassing the AP. A bunch a freepers wrote in and complained.

Fox deliberately runs hachet pieces all the time and they don't correct their mistakes.

This is evidence of two things, and neither is of a liberal media.

1) Pressure from a sitting President's campaign or a group of angry Freepers can manipulate the corporate media

or more likely,

2) AP is an imperfect but reasonably professional and responsible news organization who willingly corrects mistaken or inaccurate stories unlike

jAZ
09-05-2004, 10:37 AM
Still waiting on the non-skepticism list, jAZ...

How about CNN?
AP?
wait... now its a non-skepticism list? But you are "still waiting" for it?

:shake:

Cochise
09-05-2004, 12:03 PM
At worst it's lie by a reporter and AP caught the "lie" and revised the story appropriately.


Still haven't listened to the clip, eh?

KCWolfman
09-05-2004, 12:06 PM
You guys crack me up.

At best its an accurate account and the AP is caving to Freeper or Bush administration pressure on the story.

Most likely its a inadvertantly mistaken reporter who heared "oohs" and took them to be boos. And AP assumed it was a mistake and removed it to be safe.


Zere is nothink amiss here, please dizregard ze mezzage az it vas merely an error.





You, sir, are full of shit.

stevieray
09-05-2004, 12:14 PM
JAZ Kerry.


Like peas in a pod.

KCWolfman
09-05-2004, 12:23 PM
JAZ Kerry.


Like peas in a pod.
I am beginning to wonder if we should rename jAZ, Winston Smith. After all, like the protagonist in Orwell's 1984, he seems to have a job of re-writing text in the news and acting as if the original facts did not occur.

trndobrd
09-05-2004, 12:24 PM
After 100 posts to this thread, the high point remains Baby Lee's announcement that he took a dump.

Cochise
09-05-2004, 12:30 PM
I am beginning to wonder if we should rename jAZ, Winston Smith. After all, like the protagonist in Orwell's 1984, he seems to have a job of re-writing text in the news and acting as if the original facts did not occur.

Uh, don't you mean loyally serving the Ministry of Truth?




thoughtcriminal.

KCWolfman
09-05-2004, 12:32 PM
Uh, don't you mean loyally serving the Ministry of Truth?




thoughtcriminal.
Ministry seems to be an appropriate term with jAZ. After all, his blind zealotry reminds me of a Jim Jones Kool-Aid drinker when he tries to blindly defend a position as he does on this thread with insurmountable evidence against him.

Cochise
09-05-2004, 12:39 PM
Ministry seems to be an appropriate term with jAZ. After all, his blind zealotry reminds me of a Jim Jones Kool-Aid drinker when he tries to blindly defend a position as he does on this thread with insurmountable evidence against him.

Well, he knows that as long as he ignores and rejects the facts of the matter he won't have to cop this display of dumbassery for the ages.

WilliamTheIrish
09-05-2004, 12:57 PM
Justin Lied.....Nobody Died ROFL

stevieray
09-05-2004, 12:59 PM
Justin Lied.....Nobody Died ROFL

rep.

LVNHACK
09-05-2004, 01:47 PM
You, sir, are full of shit.



ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ...............LMFAO

LVNHACK
09-05-2004, 01:48 PM
I am beginning to wonder if we should rename jAZ, Winston Smith. After all, like the protagonist in Orwell's 1984, he seems to have a job of re-writing text in the news and acting as if the original facts did not occur.




Naw............How about Dumbjazzz.........?????

LVNHACK
09-05-2004, 01:49 PM
Ministry seems to be an appropriate term with jAZ. After all, his blind zealotry reminds me of a Jim Jones Kool-Aid drinker when he tries to blindly defend a position as he does on this thread with insurmountable evidence against him.




No doubt........... :shake:

Matt Helm
09-05-2004, 02:08 PM
Naw............How about Dumbjazzz.........?????

I like that name, rep!

Donger
09-05-2004, 02:16 PM
wait... now its a non-skepticism list? But you are "still waiting" for it?

:shake:

Just trying to ascertain which source you would believe.

You've made it clear that you don't believe the audio link provided, which happened to be from Fox.

So, which sources are acceptable?

Cochise
09-05-2004, 08:53 PM
Just trying to ascertain which source you would believe.

You've made it clear that you don't believe the audio link provided, which happened to be from Fox.

So, which sources are acceptable?

ROFL still won't name a source to avoid being pinned beyond even his credulity's breaking point ROFL

Donger
09-05-2004, 09:11 PM
ROFL still won't name a source to avoid being pinned beyond even his credulity's breaking point ROFL

What?

Still no answer?

I'm starting to believe that ole jAZ simply isn't going to answer...

2bikemike
09-05-2004, 09:15 PM
I have a question.

How liberal do you have to be to think that the liberal media is not liberal?

Donger
09-05-2004, 09:16 PM
I have a question.

How liberal do you have to be to think that the liberal media is not liberal?

Head in ostrich's ass while buried in the sand sounds about right...

Raiderhader
09-06-2004, 02:37 AM
You guys crack me up.

At best its an accurate account and the AP is caving to Freeper or Bush administration pressure on the story.

Most likely its a inadvertantly mistaken reporter who heared "oohs" and took them to be boos. And AP assumed it was a mistake and removed it to be safe.

At worst it's lie by a reporter and AP caught the "lie" and revised the story appropriately.

In either case, the AP acted professionally by reversing their original article. There's no way that this is the AP "carrying a hatchet for the Kerry campaign".

If it was, they wouldn't have willingly reversed it. It's not like this story was all over the news and embarassing the AP. A bunch a freepers wrote in and complained.

Fox deliberately runs hachet pieces all the time and they don't correct their mistakes.

This is evidence of two things, and neither is of a liberal media.

1) Pressure from a sitting President's campaign or a group of angry Freepers can manipulate the corporate media

or more likely,

2) AP is an imperfect but reasonably professional and responsible news organization who willingly corrects mistaken or inaccurate stories unlike




You are such a joke. I laugh at you.

Michael Michigan
09-06-2004, 09:03 AM
Here's how to contact the guy who invented the boos.

Per Powerline

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007733.php

thays@ap.org

Kelly Smith Tunney, director, Corporate Communications
Jack Stokes, Media Relations Manager
450 W. 33rd St.
New York, NY 10001
Email: info@ap.org
Phone: 212-621-1500
Fax: 212-621-1723

Mr. Kotter
09-06-2004, 12:06 PM
Here's how to contact the guy who invented the boos.

Per Powerline

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007733.php

thays@ap.org

Kelly Smith Tunney, director, Corporate Communications
Jack Stokes, Media Relations Manager
450 W. 33rd St.
New York, NY 10001
Email: info@ap.org
Phone: 212-621-1500
Fax: 212-621-1723

Cool. Thanks, MM. :thumb:

KCWolfman
09-06-2004, 04:26 PM
jAZ and Frankie both in the same weekend blasted by poor intel and neither willing to admit their error.

Whodathunkit?

Mr. Kotter
09-06-2004, 04:58 PM
jAZ and Frankie both in the same weekend blasted by poor intel and neither willing to admit their error.

Whodathunkit?

Poor intell?

They call for nuthooks for GW because of it....

"Forgive us our debtors, as we forgive our debtors...." means nuthooks for them??? :hmmm:

Donger
09-06-2004, 05:00 PM
wait... now its a non-skepticism list? But you are "still waiting" for it?

:shake:

You stated: "Look nothing is on the banned list of sources... but lots of things are on the skepicism list. Fox News, NewsMax, RushLimbaugh.com...

There are counter sources that you should also be skeptical of... Salon.com being one of the major ones."

So, you have a "skepticism list." Therefore, I have to assume that you have a "non-skepticism" list. Otherwise, I can only asume that you are skeptical of ALL sources.

Do you or don't you? If you do, please list the sources of that list.

Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

Cochise
09-06-2004, 07:50 PM
Well no one has bumped this in a few hours. Guess I'll take a turn.

Ugly Duck
09-06-2004, 11:30 PM
President Bush on Friday wished Bill Clinton ''best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Thats just the way Republicans are.

Mr. Kotter
09-06-2004, 11:35 PM
Thats just the way Republicans are.

Didn't bother to read the thread, did you....

probably like you "educate" yourself on the issues, too? Eh? :p

BigMeatballDave
09-07-2004, 12:36 AM
Well no one has bumped this in a few hours. Guess I'll take a turn.My turn...
:D

Joe Seahawk
09-07-2004, 12:39 AM
http://tinyurl.com/6yfug

BigMeatballDave
09-07-2004, 12:53 AM
http://tinyurl.com/6yfugI certainly didn't hear any boos in that. Then again, it was from FOX, so jAZ will dismiss it...

Michael Michigan
09-07-2004, 12:53 AM
Didn't bother to read the thread, did you....

probably like you "educate" yourself on the issues, too? Eh? :p

He's a r aider fan--what makes you think he can read?

;)

DenverChief
09-07-2004, 01:03 AM
Zig-Zag Zell?

Saggysack
09-07-2004, 02:55 AM
Zig-Zag Zell?


BOOOO!!!!

Baby Lee
09-07-2004, 05:47 AM
Thats just the way Republicans are.
Umm, . . . UD. . . Your brain fell out again.

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 07:24 AM
Umm, . . . UD. . . Your brain fell out again.

And he'll never find it without the use of a microscope!!!

StcChief
09-07-2004, 07:33 AM
The AP will explain it away as a mistake in edit.

Tough when you get caught lying.

Radar Chief
09-07-2004, 07:35 AM
jAZ and Frankie both in the same weekend blasted by poor intel and neither willing to admit their error.

Whodathunkit?

Thanks for the Readers Digest version, just saved me a ton of reading.

Mr. Kotter
09-07-2004, 09:44 AM
He's a r aider fan--what makes you think he can read?

;)

Good point.... :)

jAZ
09-07-2004, 09:55 AM
You stated: "Look nothing is on the banned list of sources... but lots of things are on the skepicism list. Fox News, NewsMax, RushLimbaugh.com...

There are counter sources that you should also be skeptical of... Salon.com being one of the major ones."

So, you have a "skepticism list." Therefore, I have to assume that you have a "non-skepticism" list. Otherwise, I can only asume that you are skeptical of ALL sources.

Do you or don't you? If you do, please list the sources of that list.

Pretty simple stuff, as usual.
Of course I'm skeptical of all sources. It's a matter of degrees. Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

Mr. Kotter
09-07-2004, 09:57 AM
Of course I'm skeptical of all sources. It's a matter of degrees. Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

TRANSLATION:

Conservative or moderate or independent sources are LIARS.

Liberal sources are the only truth, the only reality, and the only WAY!

:rolleyes:

jAZ
09-07-2004, 10:09 AM
TRANSLATION:

Conservative or moderate or independent sources are LIARS.

Liberal sources are the only truth, the only reality, and the only WAY!

:rolleyes:
Please don't try to find work as a translator with the CIA or FBI. Your "skills" would put our country at great risk.

Cochise
09-07-2004, 10:15 AM
Translation: jAZ thinks he's figured a way out by saying that he doesn't trust any source, therefore he doesn't have to believe any of the sound clips no matter how numerous the sources are that are in agreement.

Due to his newfound hate of every news source available in America, he can continue to maintain an untenable position by dismissing any evidence he doesn't like, and move from looking like a horse's ass to a much lager land mammal's ass, such as a rhinocerous ass or hippopotamus ass.

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 10:23 AM
Translation: jAZ thinks he's figured a way out by saying that he doesn't trust any source, therefore he doesn't have to believe any of the sound clips no matter how numerous the sources are that are in agreement.

Due to his newfound hate of every news source available in America, he can continue to maintain an untenable position by dismissing any evidence he doesn't like, and move from looking like a horse's ass to a much lager land mammal's ass, such as a rhinocerous ass or hippopotamus ass.

Translation: Cochise has nailed the basic premise of jaz's writing style.

He doesn't have to have sources, he makes the stuff up as he goes!!!! That way he doesn't have to provide a link and be pummeled by those that have enough sense to read/hear what is going on and make sense of it.

Velvet_Jones
09-07-2004, 10:28 AM
Man, I saw this a it sounded like one or two people booed out of a croud of 1k. I didn't know that a couple people constituted a croud. Must just be me.

R$ch Velvet

Donger
09-07-2004, 10:32 AM
Of course I'm skeptical of all sources. It's a matter of degrees. Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

Interesting.

I look forward to your next thread.

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 10:32 AM
Man, I saw this a it sounded like one or two people booed out of a croud of 1k. I didn't know that a couple people constituted a croud. Must just be me.

R$ch Velvet

If it's jaz or jettio, it is a crowd!!

jAZ
09-07-2004, 10:50 AM
Translation: jAZ thinks he's figured a way out by saying that he doesn't trust any source, therefore he doesn't have to believe any of the sound clips no matter how numerous the sources are that are in agreement.
Wrong.

Skepticism != "doesn't trust any source" :shake:

Always watch the news with a dose of skepticism. Whether its MSNBC or Fox News or Air America or Rush Limbaugh.

The more independent corroborating sources, the better. I agree 100%.

There are some sources that are propaganda outlets. Fox News is one.
There are some sources that have a strong bias. Air America is one.
There are some sources that have a weak bias. CNN is one.
There are some sources that have little bias. Christian Science Monitor is one.

But all sources should be viewed with a degree of skepticism if for no other reason than that a reasonably trusted source one day can (by a change in management) become one with a strong bias over night. That has happened with CNN over the last year or so. They've moved toward Fox in the last year.

It happened to the entire media after 9/11. They almost entirely lost their watchdog mentality. Bush had free reigh to mislead the country into Iraq. Even the the paper you guys most like to call "liberal", the NYTimes became a blind mouthpiece for those lies.

Every source should be viewed skeptically. It's not a healthy envrionment to live in, but its a necessary approach to reading or watching the news. These days.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 10:54 AM
Interesting.

I look forward to your next thread.
Why so?

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 10:58 AM
Wrong.

Skepticism != "doesn't trust any source" :shake:



There are some sources that are propaganda outlets. Fox News is one.
There are some sources that have a strong bias. Air America is one.
There are some sources that have a weak bias. CNN is one.
There are some sources that have little bias. Christian Science Monitor is one.





You left out your titles for ABC, CBS, NBC, CBN, HLN(CNN sub). Which category do you put these in?

KCTitus
09-07-2004, 10:58 AM
How far left/out there does one have to be to call the NY Times a 'blind mouthpiece' for the Bush Admin?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 10:58 AM
Man, I saw this a it sounded like one or two people booed out of a croud of 1k. I didn't know that a couple people constituted a croud. Must just be me.

R$ch Velvet
That's interesting.

Donger
09-07-2004, 11:02 AM
Wrong.

Skepticism != "doesn't trust any source" :shake:

Always watch the news with a dose of skepticism. Whether its MSNBC or Fox News or Air America or Rush Limbaugh.

The more independent corroborating sources, the better. I agree 100%.

There are some sources that are propaganda outlets. Fox News is one.
There are some sources that have a strong bias. Air America is one.
There are some sources that have a weak bias. CNN is one.
There are some sources that have little bias. Christian Science Monitor is one.

But all sources should be viewed with a degree of skepticism if for no other reason than that a reasonably trusted source one day can (by a change in management) become one with a strong bias over night. That has happened with CNN over the last year or so. They've moved toward Fox in the last year.

It happened to the entire media after 9/11. They almost entirely lost their watchdog mentality. Bush had free reigh to mislead the country into Iraq. Even the the paper you guys most like to call "liberal", the NYTimes became a blind mouthpiece for those lies.

Every source should be viewed skeptically. It's not a healthy envrionment to live in, but its a necessary approach to reading or watching the news. These days.

Do you really believe that Fox News somehow edited out the boos in the audio link I provided?

KCTitus
09-07-2004, 11:04 AM
I'd kind of like to know what differentiates between 'propoganda' and 'strong bias'...

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:04 AM
You left out your titles for ABC, CBS, NBC, CBN, HLN(CNN sub). Which category do you put these in?
What's CBN?

I'd say they are all something less than Air America (strong bias). HLN tends to have almost no bias (which is odd since CNN has moved so conservative of late).

The big 3 along with MSNBC, & CNN, have gone so tabloid that they all deserve skepticism because of the bias towards scandal.

Donger
09-07-2004, 11:05 AM
Why so?

We'll see.

You can't or won't name a source that you aren't skeptical of.

Therefore, I can't wait to see which source you use for your next thread.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:08 AM
I'd kind of like to know what differentiates between 'propoganda' and 'strong bias'...
Fox could just have a stong bias, but they coordinate their message with the Republican party and they deny it.

That's propaganda.

Air America is honest about their bias, they don't deny it. That's a strong bias.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:08 AM
We'll see.

You can't or won't name a source that you aren't skeptical of.

Therefore, I can't wait to see which source you use for your next thread.
It will be no different than any other thread/source in the past.

Baby Lee
09-07-2004, 11:08 AM
That's interesting.
In the immortal words of a noted azzhat, why so?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:12 AM
In the immortal words of a noted azzhat, how so?
A outspoken Bush supporter admits that there was at least some booing. That kinda kills the new thread title, doncha think? Sounds like even Rich can admit there were at least SOME boos.

And even still, AP chose to take out the claim.

Those damn propagandists!

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 11:14 AM
What's CBN?

I'd say they are all something less than Air America (strong bias). HLN tends to have almost no bias (which is odd since CNN has moved so conservative of late).

The big 3 along with MSNBC, & CNN, have gone so tabloid that they all deserve skepticism because of the bias towards scandal.

CBN=Christian Broadcast Network

You have not been paying much attention to HLN of late if you feel they have no bias.

There is not one singel news source in the U.S. that will report only the facts and let us decide what they mean to us. They all have their little editorial after comment. The time they use to cover a story is slanted as well. Most of us can see which direction they run.

KCTitus
09-07-2004, 11:17 AM
Fox could just have a stong bias, but they coordinate their message with the Republican party and they deny it.

That's propaganda.

Air America is honest about their bias, they don't deny it. That's a strong bias.

You wouldnt have a source for that info would you? I have never heard that Fox News and RNC are coordinating a message.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:18 AM
CBN=Christian Broadcast Network
I'm guessing they have a strong bias regarding moral issues, but I really have no idea since I've never really watched it.

Donger
09-07-2004, 11:19 AM
Fox could just have a stong bias, but they coordinate their message with the Republican party and they deny it.


Ummmm, source?

BigMeatballDave
09-07-2004, 11:21 AM
Ummmm, source?Air America...

Cochise
09-07-2004, 11:25 AM
I notice he curiously missed the question asking whether he really believed that FNC edited out the boos.

Guess he figures if he keeps digging eventually he'll end up someplace where no one knows about this debacle of a thread. :shake:

Baby Lee
09-07-2004, 11:26 AM
A outspoken Bush supporter admits that there was at least some booing. That kinda kills the new thread title, doncha think? Sounds like even Rich can admit there were at least SOME boos.

And even still, AP chose to take out the claim.

Those damn propagandists!
So in sum, one man states, on the basis of a i-net sound feed, that in all the world, one or two people may have booed news of Clinton's condition is noteworthy? But all other news accounts, as well as all other assessments by posters here, need profound scepticism?
Sounds like a thesis in search of validation to me, without a whit of concern for the truth.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:46 AM
I notice he curiously missed the question asking whether he really believed that FNC edited out the boos.

Guess he figures if he keeps digging eventually he'll end up someplace where no one knows about this debacle of a thread. :shake:
Sorry, I did miss that.

Do I think Fox "edited" them out? No.

My intial comment (it HAD to be Fox News, huh?) was 1/2 in jest (and 1/2 serious). Do I think they edited the clip? No, based on the clip it wasn't even about (attempting to disprove) the "boos".

It was a generally skeptical comment.

Do I think Fox would edit a clip for favorable effect? Sort of. I think they would pull clips to deliberately alter the context. But I think there is a limit to what they would edit.

For example (just an example), if there are 3 audio feeds at different points around the stage and they listen to all 3 and 1 of them is far enough away that it doesn't pick up any booing, they would select that feed to run.

Would they digitially edit out crowd noise in order to remove booing? No, they would just not use the audio all together.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 11:53 AM
So in sum, one man states, on the basis of a i-net sound feed, that in all the world, one or two people may have booed news of Clinton's condition is noteworthy? But all other news accounts, as well as all other assessments by posters here, need profound scepticism?
Sounds like a thesis in search of validation to me, without a whit of concern for the truth.
A group of people looking to justfiy their "liberal media" POV says that the AP lied based on an audio clip. They go on to brand the AP as a liar and just another example of the "liberal media".

One of that Bush-backing group breaks from the pack and says he heard a few boos, but nothing to write a story about.

That doesn't change the facts, but it does make all of the pack mentality about the evils of the AP and the newly revised thread title look a little stupid.

Not to mention the fact that with almost no attention at all the AP volunarily revises the story at the request of a group of Freepers... Something NewsMax and Fox News would NEVER do at the request of a group of DUers.

Donger
09-07-2004, 12:01 PM
Do I think Fox "edited" them out? No.
Do I think they edited the clip? No.

So, did you hear any boos?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 12:12 PM
So, did you hear any boos?
I hear gasps (or oohs) but I didn't hear any boos.

Donger
09-07-2004, 12:33 PM
I hear gasps (or oohs) but I didn't hear any boos.

So, how did AP make such an error?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 12:39 PM
So, how did AP make such an error?
My guess is that the reporter was standing near the "one or two people boo(ing)" and reported what he heard. The AP editors didn't fact check it enough.

The Freepers complained.

The editors double checked the speech and updated the report.

Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

Cochise
09-07-2004, 12:40 PM
My guess is that the reporter was standing near the "one or two people boo(ing)" and reported what he heard. The AP editors didn't fact check it enough.

The Freepers complained.

The editors double checked the speech and updated the report.

Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

ROFL

So if you had two Broncos fans seated behind you at Arrowhead and the Chiefs scored, and both of the Bronco fans booed, you'd conclude that the whole of the audience was booing?

ROFL

Donger
09-07-2004, 12:46 PM
My guess is that the reporter was standing near the "one or two people boo(ing)" and reported what he heard. The AP editors didn't fact check it enough.

The Freepers complained.

The editors double checked the speech and updated the report.

Pretty simple stuff, as usual.

Considering your penchant for skepticism, you certainly are giving AP a free pass, aren't you...

Look at what they are reporting now; that there were "oooohs," not boos.

Sure sounds like a news outlet trying to cover up an intentional lie to me.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 12:46 PM
ROFL

So if you had two Broncos fans seated behind you at Arrowhead and the Chiefs scored, and both of the Bronco fans booed, you'd conclude that the whole of the audience was booing?

ROFL
Terrible anlalogy.

If I went to a game at Arrowhead and sat in a section where 150+ Chiefs fans boo'd when PA announcer announced that John Elway was having open heart surgery, I would easily conclude that the audience was booing.

Mr. Kotter
09-07-2004, 12:52 PM
Terrible anlalogy.

If I went to a game at Arrowhead and sat in a section where 150+ Chiefs fans boo'd when PA announcer announced that John Elway was having open heart surgery, I would easily conclude that the audience was booing.

Only you would say 150 people out of 80,000 warrants a headline.... :rolleyes:

Besides it wasn't 150.... :shake:

jAZ
09-07-2004, 12:56 PM
Considering your penchant for skepticism, you certainly are giving AP a free pass, aren't you...

Look at what they are reporting now; that there were "oooohs," not boos.

Sure sounds like a news outlet trying to cover up an intentional lie to me.
I'm giving them a pass of sorts, but not without reason and skepticism.

If AP intentionally "lied" about a story like this, they certainly weren't very commited to it. They retracted the story and replaced it with an updated version WITHIN HOURS. And what prompted this retraction and update? A few emails?

There is no where near enough attention on the story to claim that the AP were FORCED to retract it.

No one but us and a few freepers gave a second thought to the story. If they wanted to "lie", they didn't need to retract it. There was no pressure to do so.

Fox ignores 1000x as much criticism from DUers and the like and does nothing like the retraction that AP did.

The AP without hesitation retracted the article and updated it.

That kills any rational argument of a deliberate "lie" and a "coverup". Why give up on the "lie" for no reason if it was deliberate?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 12:57 PM
Only you would say 150 people out of 80,000 warrants a headline.... :rolleyes:

Besides it wasn't 150.... :shake:
It wasn't 80,000 either.

Donger
09-07-2004, 01:00 PM
And what prompted this retraction and update? A few emails?

You forgot "being caught in a lie." Think about it: some AP reporter was stupid enough (and biased enough) to say that the crowd booed and Bush did nothing to stop them. Why stupid? Eyewitnesses and audio/video = easily verifiable.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 01:05 PM
You forgot "being caught in a lie." Think about it: some AP reporter was stupid enough (and biased enough) to say that the crowd booed and Bush did nothing to stop them. Why stupid? Eyewitnesses and audio/video = easily verifiable.
So you aren't saying AP was "lying" at all then. The only thing they were deliberate about was correcting the report?

Donger
09-07-2004, 01:10 PM
So you aren't saying AP was "lying" at all then. The only thing they were deliberate about was correcting the report?

The "reporter" who filed the story was lying. And, after being found out, the editors made their changes.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 01:18 PM
The "reporter" who filed the story was lying. And, after being found out, the editors made their changes.
Got it.

So the AP didn't lie. In fact they quickly, and with almost no pressure what-so-ever, corrected the (admittedly accurate by Velvet - but over sold) story and replaced it with one rewriting the boos as "oohs".

Yet the AP is a "liar" and a part of the "liberal media" machine?

:spock:

RINGLEADER
09-07-2004, 01:55 PM
Got it.

So the AP didn't lie. In fact they quickly, and with almost no pressure what-so-ever, corrected the (admittedly accurate by Velvet - but over sold) story and replaced it with one rewriting the boos as "oohs".

Yet the AP is a "liar" and a part of the "liberal media" machine?

:spock:


You're still on this story Jaz?

Next thing I know Jaz will be having the audio analyzed to prove there were "oohs" audible behind all the clapping and cheering.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised...his candidate is jumping up and down begging for attention about Cheney's deferments...shouldn't be surprised that Jaz is jumping up and down wanting to prove something as banal as whether there were "oohs" or "ahs" or "boos" or "bahs" at a Bush rally last week.

Donger
09-07-2004, 01:56 PM
Got it.

So the AP didn't lie. In fact they quickly, and with almost no pressure what-so-ever, corrected the (admittedly accurate by Velvet - but over sold) story and replaced it with one rewriting the boos as "oohs".

Yet the AP is a "liar" and a part of the "liberal media" machine?

:spock:

No.

The AP reporter lied, and at the very least the editors were remiss in their checking. At worst, they went along with the lie and only "corrected" the story after it was proven to be a lie.

KCTitus
09-07-2004, 02:03 PM
Got it.

So the AP didn't lie. In fact they quickly, and with almost no pressure what-so-ever, corrected the (admittedly accurate by Velvet - but over sold) story and replaced it with one rewriting the boos as "oohs".

Yet the AP is a "liar" and a part of the "liberal media" machine?

:spock:

Oddly, Jaz shows the ability to pirouette on the nuance of 'getting something wrong they believe to be true' vs. outright lying when he wants to.

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 02:10 PM
Got it.

So the AP didn't lie. In fact they quickly, and with almost no pressure what-so-ever, corrected the (admittedly accurate by Velvet - but over sold) story and replaced it with one rewriting the boos as "oohs".

Yet the AP is a "liar" and a part of the "liberal media" machine?

:spock:

I wonder if you got whiplash from changing direction so quickly. Need a neck brace just in case you do it again?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 02:42 PM
You're still on this story Jaz?
We aren't talking about the story. We're talking about AP's handling of it.

So far we've concluded that with almost no pressure at all, AP did something Fox News and NewsMax and the like wouldn't and haven't done.

Retract a story even though it was seemingly at least partially accurate... just to be careful.

I wish the Bush administration showed so much care when making their phoney case for war in Iraq. 1000 American people would likely still be alive.

Brock
09-07-2004, 02:43 PM
1000 American people would likely still be alive.

Like you really care in any sense beyond the political.

Cochise
09-07-2004, 03:02 PM
Like you really care in any sense beyond the political.

I like how he qualified that by saying "1000 American people", because he knew the comment was coming that Hussein killed thousands of people every year.

I guess to jAZ only American deaths mean anything. The hell with those women in the rape houses in Iraq or the people being thrown into Saddam's wood chippers or fed to his lions.

jAZ
09-07-2004, 03:09 PM
I like how he qualified that by saying "1000 American people", because he knew the comment was coming that Hussein killed thousands of people every year.

I guess to jAZ only American deaths mean anything. The hell with those women in the rape houses in Iraq or the people being thrown into Saddam's wood chippers or fed to his lions.
So much for this being about protecting our country, huh?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 03:11 PM
Like you really care in any sense beyond the political.
You have no idea what you are talking about. None.

Matt Helm
09-07-2004, 03:23 PM
So much for this being about protecting our country, huh?

What part of liberating the people of Iraq did you miss?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 03:25 PM
What part of liberating the people of Iraq did you miss?
The part where that protects our country against al Qaeda. You guys flip-flop on this war more than anyone could ever imagined.

Donger
09-07-2004, 03:56 PM
We aren't talking about the story. We're talking about AP's handling of it.

So far we've concluded that with almost no pressure at all, AP did something Fox News and NewsMax and the like wouldn't and haven't done.

Retract a story even though it was seemingly at least partially accurate... just to be careful.

I wish the Bush administration showed so much care when making their phoney case for war in Iraq. 1000 American people would likely still be alive.

No pressure at all?

Didn't you write earlier that AP changed the story because of Freeper pressure and that the reporting of boos was unflattering to Bush. In other words, the boos actually DID happen, but being Bush toadies, AP changed their story as to not upset Bush.

Now that it has been shown that the audience did not boo (and the original AP was a lie), you praise AP for "being careful?"

Sure are covering your bases, aren't you? Except, of course, for refusing to consider that the only reason that AP changed the story was that they got caught in a lie.... I guess you're not THAT skeptical, eh?

jAZ
09-07-2004, 04:09 PM
No pressure at all?
Dude, don't be that guy. You know I didn't say that.

Donger
09-07-2004, 04:13 PM
Dude, don't be that guy. You know I didn't say that.

Sorry, forgot the "almost."

Duck Dog
09-07-2004, 04:26 PM
2 things.

I can believe jaz is still here arguing a losing battle.

But, I can't believe he still has someone to argue with. :hmmm:

jAZ
09-07-2004, 04:27 PM
Sorry, forgot the "almost."
Yeah, "forgot".

Donger
09-07-2004, 04:31 PM
Yeah, "forgot".

See, you are bizarrely skeptical. It was an honest mistake.

I suppose that's where you and I differ:

1. I can admit when I make mistakes. Believing that you are infallible is often a sign of a delusional mind.

2. When someone does admit they made a mistake, I don't turn around and question their honesty. If you do, fine, but it just makes you look like an even bigger a$$, IMO.

Donger
09-07-2004, 04:31 PM
2 things.

I can believe jaz is still here arguing a losing battle.

But, I can't believe he still has someone to argue with. :hmmm:

I'm easily entertained.

Duck Dog
09-07-2004, 04:42 PM
I'm easily entertained.


Don't let me stop ya. Watching you rip jaz up one side and down the other is pretty entertaining to watch.

Duck Dog
09-07-2004, 04:43 PM
Don't let me stop ya. Watching you rip jaz up one side and down the other is pretty entertaining to watch.


Hey, that was 4000.

Only took me like 5 years to make it.

Mr. Kotter
09-08-2004, 07:49 AM
Hey, that was 4000.

Only took me like 5 years to make it.

Like me, you seemed to have picked up the pace of late.... :)

Cochise
09-08-2004, 10:25 AM
Believing that you are infallible is often a sign of a delusional mind.

When someone does admit they made a mistake, I don't turn around and question their honesty. If you do, fine, but it just makes you look like an even bigger a$$, IMO.

:clap:

Raiderhader
09-08-2004, 12:24 PM
There are some sources that have a weak bias. CNN is one.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Yeah Justin, I can see that you are real middle of the road like you are always trying to tell us. The Clinton News Network has a "weak" bias. ROFL ROFL ROFL

Seek professional help immediately.

Raiderhader
09-08-2004, 12:28 PM
We aren't talking about the story. We're talking about AP's handling of it.

So far we've concluded that with almost no pressure at all, AP did something Fox News and NewsMax and the like wouldn't and haven't done.

Retract a story even though it was seemingly at least partially accurate... just to be careful.

I wish the Bush administration showed so much care when making their phoney case for war in Iraq. 1000 American people would likely still be alive.


You are as f#cking pathetic as Denise.

As to the "phoney case for war", that is a bold faced lie, and you know it.

Raiderhader
09-08-2004, 12:30 PM
You are as f#cking pathetic as Denise.

As to the "phoney case for war", that is a bold faced lie, and you know it.


If we are going to turn the tRaider's name into code for a smilie, I could think of better smilies to use.

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:31 PM
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Yeah Justin, I can see that you are real middle of the road like you are always trying to tell us. The Clinton News Network has a "weak" bias. ROFL ROFL ROFL

Seek professional help immediately.
You are gonna love it when I tell you that CNN has a weak Republican bias.

Raiderhader
09-08-2004, 12:32 PM
You are gonna love it when I tell you that CNN has a weak Republican bias.



ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Dude, quit it, you're killing me here!

Donger
09-08-2004, 12:32 PM
You are gonna love it when I tell you that CNN has a weak Republican bias.

How so?

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:33 PM
You are as f#cking pathetic as Denise.

As to the "phoney case for war", that is a bold faced lie, and you know it.
Hell no it's not.

They created a phoney case for war. I've been saying it for years, and it's only more evident today than it was back then.

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:34 PM
How so?
They have been "Foxified".

Donger
09-08-2004, 12:35 PM
They have been "Foxified".

What do you mean by that?

Raiderhader
09-08-2004, 12:39 PM
Hell no it's not.

They created a phoney case for war. I've been saying it for years, and it's only more evident today than it was back then.


Hell yes it is. You got nothing here, no facts, no truth, nothing. Nothing but conjecture, speculation, conspiracy theories, and LIES. Which in the REAL world is absolutely nothing. If arguments were legs, you wouldn't have one to stand on. I've gone through all of it before, if I must do so again I will.

Er, after I go get a bite to eat.

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:44 PM
What do you mean by that?
Dude, do I need to hold you hand? I'm not walking you through every conversation one narrow question at a time.

Donger
09-08-2004, 12:46 PM
Dude, do I need to hold you hand? I'm not walking you through every conversation one narrow question at a time.

Sorry, but "Foxified" could mean many things.

No skin off my nose if you don't want to explain yourself.

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:46 PM
Hell yes it is. You got nothing here, no facts, no truth, nothing. Nothing but conjecture, speculation, conspiracy theories, and LIES. Which in the REAL world is absolutely nothing. If arguments were legs, you wouldn't have one to stand on. I've gone through all of it before, if I must do so again I will.

Er, after I go get a bite to eat.
The facts are that BushCo lied when they said they knew where the WMD where. That it was 100%. They lied when they said it was a slam dunk.

Feel free to read here for a decent summary of the rest.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=97900

Radar Chief
09-08-2004, 12:47 PM
You are gonna love it when I tell you that CNN has a weak Republican bias.

Drop the crack pipe, dude.

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:50 PM
Sorry, but "Foxified" could mean many things.

No skin off my nose if you don't want to explain yourself.
Tell me what it could mean. Then tell me what you think it means.

Donger
09-08-2004, 12:54 PM
Tell me what it could mean. Then tell me what you think it means.

It could mean that they are finally becoming less liberal.
It could mean that they are using really annoying graphics.
It could mean that they have "CNN Alerts" every ten minutes.
It could mean that they are getting better looking female reporters.

I have no idea what it really means, because I haven't turned on CNN in years. That's why I asked you.

jAZ
09-08-2004, 12:56 PM
It could mean that they are finally becoming less liberal.
It could mean that they are using really annoying graphics.
It could mean that they have "CNN Alerts" every ten minutes.
It could mean that they are getting better looking female reporters.
Is it necessary to turn on CNN to know what I'm saying when I say CNN has been "Foxified", given that I've already said that "CNN has a weak Republican bias"?

Are you able to put two and two together?

Donger
09-08-2004, 12:58 PM
Is it necessary to turn on CNN to know what I'm saying when I say CNN has been "Foxified", given that I've already said that "CNN has a weak Republican bias"?

Ah, I see. You think that CNN has a weak Republican bias.

Why do you think that?

Are you able to put two and two together?

Yes. Four.