• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

For all who balsted media matters:

Mellie said:
Maggie, here's my problem with it. If Breitbart KNEW there was more to it and INTENTIONALLY left out the rest of the story in order to paint her as a racist, I would completely agree with you.
Click to expand...

LOL. It does not take Einstein to figure out there was more to the original 2 minutes. It's starts with "You know, he first time I faced...". Are you telling me you think that's how her speech starts? Also, did you not notice the cut at 1:45? And what about the ending? Did it give you the impression that it was the end of her speech? Where's the applause? You must think Breitbart is a freaking moron.


What is interesting is that the NAACP had the ENTIRE VIDEO and yet did not immediately provide her boss or the White House with that proof. The White House pressured her to resign based on fear that she would "be on Glenn Beck". They forced her to resign based on 50% of the information WHICH THEY COULD'VE GOTTEN FROM THE NAACP.
Click to expand...

Where was it stored at the NAACP? Who housed the video? Did they know that it existed in their files? Do you not think it's president would have immediately done something to help her out rather than throwing her under a bus? Sure, they seem somewhat unorganized, but trust me, it happens a lot. I experience it almost every day at my workplace. It takes me sometimes 10 phone call to find a freakin logo.

Something just seems funny about it. Either the administration is completely moronic and just fires people willy-nilly because they're afraid of Glenn Beck or there's something more behind this.
Click to expand...

IMO, a jellyfish has more spine that this wimpy WH administration.

The White House would benefit from Breitbart being silenced, ya know....
Click to expand...

Humanity would benefit from Brietbart being silenced.
 
liblady said:
Grim has lied in his post, and his own link PROVES it.

FOXNews.com - Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer

now, this clip contains this: The Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned.

THUS PROVING THAT FOXNEWS.COM DID INDEED PUBLISH THE STORY ON JULY 19th, AS MEDIA MATTERS REPORTED.

so, grim and others, what now? apologies?

um....BLASTED.
Click to expand...

hell no! She a racist bitch.
 
Grim17 said:
Let's settle this once and for all, so you can issue your retraction and we can move on LL.

The following comes from a story published yesterday on Politico. I suggest you write this stuff down to avoid any more confusion.





Got it LL? It was published at 5:58 pm



Got it LL?

The story was never taken down, it was just updated as I have repeatedly stated. The stories original content, before the update was added, was published by a liberal "gotcha" website, which MM took a screen shot of and used in their time line hit piece. All you have to do is compare the screen shot with the story as it now appears on Foxnews.com, and you will see they are virtually the same.

Are the facts finally sinking in LL?

Here's some bonus coverage for you:




And then comes the icing on the cake:



Now it's time to find out whether you are a person of integrity, or just another in a long line of liberals that put politics before truth.

Your move LL.
Click to expand...
Are you a person of integrity, Grim? Are you going to admit your were wrong or are you just another in a long line of conservatives that can't admit they're WRONG?
 
My problem with this entire mess is very simple and straight-forward.

Breitbart was upset with the NAACP for having his fringe element of the Tea Party movement outsted. He wanted payback. So, when he came into possession of a tape that presented (who I can only conclude he assumed to be) a member of the NAACP and certainly an appointed official within the Obama Administration declaring before an assembly of the NAACP membership that she showed biasness against a white farmer in the performance of her duties, he was more than eager to post the video on his website.

FoxNews got wind of the video and obviously figured they could kill two birds with one stone:

1. They'd use the video to show racism from within the NAACP using footage from one of their own meetings against them. And...

2. They'd use the video to show that the speaker was, in fact, a political appointee of the Obama Administration.

The only problem was FoxNews didn't verify the accuracy of the video before going public with it. For if they had taken the advise their Senior VP of news editorial, Michael Clemente, and "got the facts and obtain comment from Sherrod before going on air," they could have prevented this political and racially charged firestorm before it ever got started. Of course, then they wouldn't have had a story.
 
liblady said:
Grim has lied in his post, and his own link PROVES it.

FOXNews.com - Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer

now, this clip contains this: The Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned.

THUS PROVING THAT FOXNEWS.COM DID INDEED PUBLISH THE STORY ON JULY 19th, AS MEDIA MATTERS REPORTED.

so, grim and others, what now? apologies?

um....BLASTED.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this very mature and well thought attack on the bad conservative. You are 100% deserving of everyone's apologies. We are not worthy.

Everyone aid me in expressing our ineptitude and Liblady's godliness by repeating after me.

"Master Liblady guide us. Master Liblady teach us. Master Liblady protect us. In your light we thrive. In your mercy we are sheltered. In your wisdom we are humbled. We live only to serve. Our lives are yours."


Sarcasm aside, was it really necessary to create a whole thread just to "BLAST" another member who was wrong? I mean seriously, move on.
 
Last edited:
On every other forum I'm a member of this thread would be considered baiting and would be locked but since she's a lib she gets away with it. If I'd do this I'd get a nastygram via pm and more points added to my naughty score. I've only been reprimanded by liberal moderators here. If people don't think the moderating here is politically biased they're dumber than the stump I dug up last week.

Rightwingnutjob said:
Thank you for this very mature and well thought attack on the bad conservative. You are 100% deserving of everyone's apologies. We are not worthy.

Everyone aid me in expressing our ineptitude and Liblady's godliness by repeating after me.

"Master Liblady guide us. Master Liblady teach us. Master Liblady protect us. In your light we thrive. In your mercy we are sheltered. In your wisdom we are humbled. We live only to serve. Our lives are yours."


Sarcasm aside, was it really necessary to create a whole thread just to "BLAST" another member who was wrong? I mean seriously, move on.
Click to expand...
 
dontworrybehappy said:
On every other forum I'm a member of this thread would be considered baiting and would be locked but since she's a lib she gets away with it. If I'd do this I'd get a nastygram via pm and more points added to my naughty score. I've only been reprimanded by liberal moderators here. If people don't think the moderating here is politically biased they're dumber than the stump I dug up last week.
Click to expand...

I haven't been around long enough to judge, but in the 2 pm's I've gotten so far, I feel the decision has been fair. I guess only time will tell.
 
The liberal fascination with Fox News is beyond legitimacy with this issue, considering it was a media-wide phenomenon and a White House fumble.
 
Hicup said:
She won't answer your question becasue I suspect it will out her as a rabid liberal bent on the destruction of Fox News.. :) She might even be one of those MM's Fox Watchers, and her report is due by friday. :)

Sad..


Tim-
Click to expand...

and you know this how? sad.
 
liblady said:
and you know this how? sad.
Click to expand...

Because you chose, and continue to choose, to ignore the question and not answer it. You missed a golden opprotunity to answer it. Instead, you say "and you know this how?" We know it because you won't answer it, time and time again!! :lamo The reasoning behind you ignoring it is clear, because it legitimizes Foxnews as a source serious and reliable enough that your messiah takes it's word blindly without fact checking. Basically, you ignore the question because the answer makes your messiah look BAD!!!

That being said, FNC didn't show the video until Bill O'Rielly that night, after she'd been laid off. Even though FNC showed their TV coverage for the day she was fired and the first time the video was played was on Bill O'Rielly at 8:49pm eastern. That's fact, they showed the video themselves. It was easy to see.
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
Because you chose, and continue to choose, to ignore the question and not answer it. You missed a golden opprotunity to answer it. Instead, you say "and you know this how?" We know it because you won't answer it, time and time again!! :lamo The reasoning behind you ignoring it is clear, because it legitimizes Foxnews as a source serious and reliable enough that your messiah takes it's word blindly without fact checking. Basically, you ignore the question because the answer makes your messiah look BAD!!!

That being said, FNC didn't show the video until Bill O'Rielly that night, after she'd been laid off. Even though FNC showed their TV coverage for the day she was fired and the first time the video was played was on Bill O'Rielly at 8:49pm eastern. That's fact, they showed the video themselves. It was easy to see.
Click to expand...

except, i have never ignored obama's actions regarding the firing of sherrod. and this thread is not about his actions. FAIL. also, this thread is not about fox tv. FAIL.
 
liblady said:
Grim has lied in his post, and his own link PROVES it.

FOXNews.com - Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer

now, this clip contains this: The Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned.

THUS PROVING THAT FOXNEWS.COM DID INDEED PUBLISH THE STORY ON JULY 19th, AS MEDIA MATTERS REPORTED.

so, grim and others, what now? apologies?

um....BLASTED.
Click to expand...





So you are saying the POTUS used a hostile news source to his administration to base ending a womans carreer over?


:shock:
 
liblady said:
Grim has lied in his post, and his own link PROVES it.

FOXNews.com - Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer

now, this clip contains this: The Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned.

THUS PROVING THAT FOXNEWS.COM DID INDEED PUBLISH THE STORY ON JULY 19th, AS MEDIA MATTERS REPORTED.

so, grim and others, what now? apologies?

um....BLASTED.
Click to expand...

Watching Grim trying to parse and pick apart a media matters piece it like watching Micheal Moore haters try to pick apart one of his films. They don't get that intelligent people know and accept it's left-leaning... but we also know how to pick out the facts from one point to the next. On some stories MM reaches, on others, they expose the misdeeds by FNC and far-right radio.

Show transcripts don't lie. That's what was said. AND, if what was said doesn't match the fact check -- then the pundit is misleading his/her audience. That's the point. Beck goes so far out on a fringe-right limb, playing fast and loose with the truth and the facts. Grim can't stand to know about this; have his hero exposed as a dishonest fraud... I understand his reluctance to read or honestly consider anything from MM.
 
hazlnut said:
Watching Grim trying to parse and pick apart a media matters piece it like watching Micheal Moore haters try to pick apart one of his films. They don't get that intelligent people know and accept it's left-leaning... but we also know how to pick out the facts from one point to the next. On some stories MM reaches, on others, they expose the misdeeds by FNC and far-right radio.

Show transcripts don't lie. That's what was said. AND, if what was said doesn't match the fact check -- then the pundit is misleading his/her audience. That's the point. Beck goes so far out on a fringe-right limb, playing fast and loose with the truth and the facts. Grim can't stand to know about this; have his hero exposed as a dishonest fraud... I understand his reluctance to read or honestly consider anything from MM.
Click to expand...

Granted, but Media Matters is close to the lamest excuse for a watchdog site. Then again, people enjoy that sort of ridiculous gotcha game anyway.
 
Grim17 said:
No honesty... no integrity... Typical liberal.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

No honesty... no integrity... Typical conservative.

You proved nothing more than you have an opinion. Boo Hoo.
 
Moderator's Warning:
The personal crap ends now.
 
I won't quote you because I got in trouble for quoting a mod once, but this whole thread is based in being personal. It calls someone out in the first post and just continues from there...
 
Rightwingnutjob said:
I won't quote you because I got in trouble for quoting a mod once, but this whole thread is based in being personal. It calls someone out in the first post and just continues from there...
Click to expand...

I'm obviously not the right kind of poster that's afforded protection from personal attack. I'm used to it though. When the shoe is on the other foot however.........
 
Rightwingnutjob said:
I won't quote you because I got in trouble for quoting a mod once, but this whole thread is based in being personal. It calls someone out in the first post and just continues from there...
Click to expand...


Like I said, this is a "baiting" thread on any other forum but this one, well at least if posted by a conservative or libertarian on this forum. The moderating here is very biased. I guarantee that had a conservative called out a liberal the same way the thread would be locked or at the very least an infraction be given to that person. No WAY would this fly against a liberal here. The liberals here are protected to a very high degree, with the conservatives and libertarians given only the bare amount of protection from attack. Liberals are given tons of wiggle room with attacks. I report stuff and ask the mods why nothing was done and they say "moderating is private." That is on purpose. That way you can't tell if someone was reprimanded that way you can't say nothing was done about it. But a quick PM to that person with them saying "No, I never got any warnings or infractions for anything lately" is something the mods here can't deny. They think their moderating is private, but members talk. And lessons are learned. I was a moderator on another forum so I know what biased moderating looks like. I also know why moderating is kept out of the public eye. It gives the moderators the right to reprimand who they want when they want and since it's a private forum, they don't have to disclose what they do. Trust me, it's no secret. There are a few non-biased moderators out there, but believe it or not, they tend to lean conservative. Funny huh?

But other than biased moderating, it's a really good forum with nice members.
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
Like I said, this is a "baiting" thread ...
Click to expand...
I disagree, all liblady did was to put up an alternate thead that refutes Grim's thread "Media Matters busted again... Uses deception to falsely attack Fox on Sherrod story."

Grim used a false premises by saying Media Matters unfairly listed Foxnews.com second in a timeline, when in fact that's not what did at all. Foxnews.com was mentioned second because they were mentioned in the lede of their reporting. And the were mentioned there because they are a major news gathering organization taking unvetted video from Andrew Breitbart:

The lede reads:

Media Matters has documented a timeline of Andrew Breitbart's smear of Shirley Sherrod, from Breitbart's initial posting of his deceptively edited clip of Sherrod -- which was amplified by Fox News and other right-wing media -- through the release of the full video of Sherrod's comments, which made clear the context of her remarks.
Click to expand...


Timeline of Breitbart's Sherrod smear
 
pbrauer said:
I disagree, all liblady did was to put up an alternate thead that refutes Grim's thread "Media Matters busted again... Uses deception to falsely attack Fox on Sherrod story."

Grim used a false premises by saying Media Matters unfairly listed Foxnews.com second in a timeline, when in fact that's not what did at all. Foxnews.com was mentioned second because they were mentioned in the lede of their reporting. And the were mentioned there because they are a major news gathering organization taking unvetted video from Andrew Breitbart:

The lede reads:




Timeline of Breitbart's Sherrod smear
Click to expand...

Incorrect. In the OP of this thread the first words out of her mouth are:

Grim has lied in his post, and his own link PROVES it.
Click to expand...

This is known as "calling someone out." This is baiting. This is *supposed* to be against the rules. This thread exists for the sole reason of attacking Grim. You cannot deny that honestly. Saying anything less is dishonest. Had she not said those words, this thread would be legal and not be considered baiting. When you say "to all who BLASTED (spelling corrected) media matters" that's fine. That's broad and perfectly legal. But when you call out a member as the first word in the OP of the thread, nope, that's baiting. She didn't say anything nice either, she called him a liar. If grim feels the need to defend himself here, this thread shouldn't exist. NO thread should exist for the sole purpose of "calling someone a liar and proving someone wrong."

When I was a moderator I was told it is easy to determine if a post is "baiting." You ask yourself if the OP of the thread would be more appropriate in a PM to the person being mentioned. If the answer is yes, it is baiting.

This is baiting. I find it hilarious that a moderator would come in here and say to stop the personal attacks when the sole purpose of this thread is directed at one person, calling them a liar. If that isn't a personal attack, I don't know what is. The entire THREAD should be gone. But I'm not a moderator so I just sit back and chuckle at this circus.
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
Like I said, this is a "baiting" thread on any other forum but this one, well at least if posted by a conservative or libertarian on this forum. The moderating here is very biased. I guarantee that had a conservative called out a liberal the same way the thread would be locked or at the very least an infraction be given to that person. No WAY would this fly against a liberal here. The liberals here are protected to a very high degree, with the conservatives and libertarians given only the bare amount of protection from attack. Liberals are given tons of wiggle room with attacks. I report stuff and ask the mods why nothing was done and they say "moderating is private." That is on purpose. That way you can't tell if someone was reprimanded that way you can't say nothing was done about it. But a quick PM to that person with them saying "No, I never got any warnings or infractions for anything lately" is something the mods here can't deny. They think their moderating is private, but members talk. And lessons are learned. I was a moderator on another forum so I know what biased moderating looks like. I also know why moderating is kept out of the public eye. It gives the moderators the right to reprimand who they want when they want and since it's a private forum, they don't have to disclose what they do. Trust me, it's no secret. There are a few non-biased moderators out there, but believe it or not, they tend to lean conservative. Funny huh?

But other than biased moderating, it's a really good forum with nice members.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I have equal warnings from both conservative and liberal moderators. (1-1 so far)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom