aquapub
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 7,317
- Reaction score
- 344
- Location
- America (A.K.A., a red state)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
aquapub said:Franken and others like him on the left are the liars, NOT Republicans.
aquapub said:Franken was accurate exactly ONE time in his book.
Umm, what? Dale Earnhardt represents the little guy? And that is then a bias and then....A=C therefore C=B. That's quite the syllogism.aquapub said:Ann Coulter said Dale Earnhardt's death wasn't published until days after it happened in the New York Times. She used this to try to explain why she thought the paper didn't mind being so biased-that they were so out of touch with the little guy.
And to give you a more accurate example of who the REAL liar is in Al Franken's self-promoting drivel, I give you Evan Thomas. Another irrelevant detail he challenged was that the editor of Newsweek was the son of the founder of Communist front party- The Reform Party. Franken spent pages showing transcripts of his call to Evan Thomas asking him if he was the son of that man and carefully avoiding asking the question certain ways. The reason, I found out, is that Evan Thomas is the GRANDson of that person. It was a meaningless error that had zero impact on what Coulter was arguing, but FRANKEN, not Coulter chose to dishonestly parade it around as some sort of proof that conservatives lie when HE was the only one lying.
aquapub said:I did a research project on media bias that won an academic award. In one small part of it, I used Lexis Nexis and other research databases to sort out the accuracy of Franken's statements vs. Ann Coulter's. Franken was accurate exactly ONE time in his book.
Ann Coulter said Dale Earnhardt's death wasn't published until days after it happened in the New York Times. She used this to try to explain why she thought the paper didn't mind being so biased-that they were so out of touch with the little guy. Lexis Nexis verifies that there was a story on it in the paper. More important than this small mistake though (and what was conspicuously missing from Franken's chapter on her was any challenged whatsoever to the mountains of evidence she compiled against the paper. Evidence of them shamelessly skewing polls, flat out lying about certain Republicans, witholding stories that made liberals look bad, editing out critical information from their stories. NOT ONE MENTION.
And to give you a more accurate example of who the REAL liar is in Al Franken's self-promoting drivel, I give you Evan Thomas. Another irrelevant detail he challenged was that the editor of Newsweek was the son of the founder of Communist front party- The Reform Party. Franken spent pages showing transcripts of his call to Evan Thomas asking him if he was the son of that man and carefully avoiding asking the question certain ways. The reason, I found out, is that Evan Thomas is the GRANDson of that person. It was a meaningless error that had zero impact on what Coulter was arguing, but FRANKEN, not Coulter chose to dishonestly parade it around as some sort of proof that conservatives lie when HE was the only one lying.
Basing this (or any thread) on the word of this left-wing jackass makes an ass of the person who actually takes him seriously.
Franken and others like him on the left are the liars, NOT Republicans.
We suspect you know the answer to that; Coulter was inventing. (Again!) In fact, the Times did run the story of Earnhardt’s death on its front page on Monday, February 19. (NEXIS makes this perfectly clear. Which part of “Page 1” doesn’t Coulter understand?) The headline might have provided a clue: “Stock Car Star Killed on Last Lap of Daytona 500.” The piece was written by Robert Lipsyte. Here’s how the Timesman began:
LIPSYTE (page one, 2/19/01): Stock car racing’s greatest current star and one of its most popular and celebrated figures, Dale Earnhardt, crashed and was killed today after he made a characteristically bold lunge for better position on the last turn of the last lap of the sport’s premier event, the Daytona 500.
Yes, I saw the note buried in the back of the book. Unless your retarded, comprehending footnotes is nowhere near as complicated as Franken is making it out to be in that example.
Need another example?
Franken made another one of his mind-numbingly childish personal attacks about Coulter for using the terms, "Jackson, Fascism, Britain, and South Africa" on a Lexis Nexis search to find any reporting on a speech Jesse Jackson's-and finding none. He says, "Well yeah," as if she made up unrelated words to sabatoge the search and be able to claim that she couldn't find anything on Lexis Nexis.
What the unfunny worm leaves out is that the speech was given by Jackson in South Africa, and in it, he compared British and American conservatives to German fascists of the 1940s. Coulter's search criteria were completely sensible, but you wouldn't know it to read Franken's steaming load of baseless attacks and mockery.
I can give examples of what a liar Franken is all day long.
Originally Posted by aquapub
I did a research project on media bias that won an academic award. In one small part of it, I used Lexis Nexis and other research databases to sort out the accuracy of Franken's statements vs. Ann Coulter's. Franken was accurate exactly ONE time in his book.
aquapub said:That is very telling. Franken does more for my faith in Republicans than most Republicans.
hipsterdufus said:Aquapub,
What Academic Award did you win? Can you post your research project? I would love to see it.
George_Washington said:Very true. I think Mr. Franken is just pissed cause his Stuart Smally movie never did well and his comedy career never went anywhere. Franken is the most prissy, childish person by the way he attacks Republicans. Like that book he wrote, "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot". He didn't have to call Rush names or commented on his weight. That just shows you how immature he is.
If you think that's classic, look at this follow-up pic where they show where moveon.org doctored the photo.Deegan said:This one is classic, but we all knew what Moveon was all about, I just never thought they would be soooo obvious........
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200511\POL20051130c.html
shuamort said:If you think that's classic, look at this follow-up pic where they show where moveon.org doctored the photo.
Maybe there's a puritan who's against nekkid legs.Pacridge said:I don't understand. Why couldn't they just use actual footage of our troops eating? What's their reasoning in doctoring something like this? What's it prove-That our troops eat meals in Iraq?
Deegan said:This one is classic, but we all knew what Moveon was all about, I just never thought they would be soooo obvious........
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200511\POL20051130c.html
hipsterdufus said:It seems like a pretty easy mistake to make. My 3,000,000 friends at MoveOn could have easily inserted pix of American troops - the point is the same.
Is that all you got?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?