Yes I did "miss" that part of your post, because it does not exist.
O'rly?
So why do you consider Daily Kos fraudulent? They reported the results of the poll conducted by another party. If Drudge/Other news outlets did not commit fraud by reporting what was later a false story, then how can Daily Kos be considered fraudulent when they themselves are effectively reporting the story conducted by a third party? I get you don't like Daily Kos, but your position seems highly inconsistent.
You do realize you quoted that in post #36 no?
It doesn't exist...except in the original post and your own quotation. Quite an imaginary world you live in.
As the post is only four post up this same page, that disingenuous feint is as unsuccessful as it is obvious.
Because.....You say so? Wow. Did you expect that to work?
You really need to follow the, as MG says, plainly printed and easy to follow English, rather than the imaginary stuff you think you are reading. Much like above where you misremembered what you actually said, even though it is on this page and only four posts up the scroll, you are again off on a wild goose chase of your own imagination.
Come again?
I posted "
"If Drudge/Other news outlets." in post #35
I then recited it in post #37.
How does that mean I misremembered what I said in an earlier post? Now, if what I said in post #35 was really in post #37, you'd have a point. But you don't. All you have is a very distorted sense of linear time where post #35 comes after post #37. But you're not the only person here incapable of understanding linear time.
My "logic" regarding Daily Kos is that it is neither neutral nor even handed, nor particularly honest or credible.
That's inaccurate statement. Yrour logic is neither neutral nor even handed, nor particularly honest or credible. Corrected for your pleasure.
It is pretty ironclad logic too, but I'll be glad to review their history with you at leisure if you are feeling foolish enough to try to argue against their public record.
Okay..based on what? You hold a group that reported data from a third party as fraudulent, but you don't hold groups that reported data from a third party as fraudulent. Neither of which actually produced the data in question.
Tell me, how is that ironclad?
All of the news outlets that reported the story reported a real story. They did no fraudulent reporting, they reported the fact that a woman did indeed file a report with police claiming she had been attacked by an Obama supporter. Within a matter of days they then reported the police felt the reported assault was fraudulent, and stated they would be asking the supposed victim of the fraudulent attack to take a polygraph examination. The accuser then confessed she had lied and scratched the B on her face, backwards, herself. The news outlets then reported that the accuser had confessed and the attack, as was suspected from the outset, was then reported to be fraudulent.
So Daily Kos, who, like the media, did not originate the story, and is now like the media outlets reporting the invalidity of the data, is fraudulent, but the media who did the same principle is not?
Iron Clad logic you say? Sure, if we add about 5000 degrees Kelvin to the mix. Tell me, how strong is iron heated to 5,000 K?
So if you think that watching you misstate what you actually said, as well as ignorantly claim that the reporting on the reported attack was fraudulent, not the attack was fraudulent, while demonstrating a weak grasp of what it is that the players in this situation actually reported and in the case of Drudge Report actually do, makes me "pissy" then fantasize away.
Misstate?
Apparently post #37 comes before post #35 to you. Math, Time and English Comprehension clearly do not come here often.
But then you might actually think that if a news outlet reports a story that turns out days later and after investigation to have been fraudulent, and then reports the results of the investigation as having been found to be fraudulent, it is the news outlet which is committing fraud. :doh
You do realize you haven't proven anything I said is wrong no? All you did was insult me. In fact you have gone out of your way to deliberately avoid discussing what I actually argued. The point of using the story was to point out that your logic is hypocritical.
You hold one group as fraudulent for reporting data they believed to be true and did not create as true while holding another group as honest for for reporting data they believed to be true and did not create as true. That is by definition a double standard. If you don't like your logic, ditch it but don't get all pissy at me for using it against you. The fact you don't like Daily Kos is irrelevant here. Your
sole savings grace here is to prove that Daily Kos knew the data was fraudulent and reported it anyways. Otherwise, you are either ignorant of what fraud means or you are being deliberately dishonest.
BTW- According to your logic, since Daily Kos admits to using fraudulent polling data, Daily Kos is guilty of fraudulent reporting or is at the least, as you say, an accessory to fraud.:lamo
Actually, it's
your logic. The fact it took you that long to recognize it is pretty sad.
Furthermore, using fraudulent data you believed to be true and did not create is not fraud. Unless you'd like to redefine that, but that makes pretty much everyone who pushed data later found out to be false as frauds. Like the past President.
