the lying liberal media lies again

[Nilly]

Carson's analogy was unfortunate but no where did he call the refugees rabid dogs. In fact, he pointed out that he "loved dogs," which, when taken in the same spirit, should tell the listener that he loves Muslims.

Oh so he was only comparing Muslims to dogs then.

Much better.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

So he compared refugees to "rabid dogs". In which he did. And your upset that the media is calling him out and presenting what occurred? I got an idea, maybe bigots shouldnt openly make bigoted comments.

 

[Moderate Right]

I was watching ABC news myself and thought the exact same thing. They start out with the headline and then, I'll give them some credit, they played exactly what Carson said and it didn't match their own headline at all. Just the liberal slant was presented. The thing wasn't even newsworthy at all.

 

[tres borrachos]

Oh so he was only comparing Muslims to dogs then.

Much better.

How did you get that out of his post? That isn't what he said, and what you said is a lie. Carson didn't compare Muslims to dogs. The amount of dishonest posts in this thread is astounding.

 

[tres borrachos]

So he compared refugees to "rabid dogs". In which he did. And your upset that the media is calling him out and presenting what occurred? I got an idea, maybe bigots shouldnt openly make bigoted comments.

No he didn't. He compared processes, not the beings involved in the process.

It apparently isn't just the liberal media who is struggling with this. It's also our liberal posters.

 

[tres borrachos]

Based on the amazingly dumb Liberal logic I'm seeing in this thread and from ABC news, if I compared the treatment of cancer to what a mechanic does to a car, I'm calling cancer a car.

 

[ocean515]

Based on the amazingly dumb Liberal logic I'm seeing in this thread and from ABC news, if I compared the treatment of cancer to what a mechanic does to a car, I'm calling cancer a car.

Or if a doctor says they are going to try to beat cancer into submission they are admitting they are violent thugs.

 

[Eric7216]

Yah I thought it was a good comparison. They quoted him on the tv news.

FOX is pro-GOP and all the others are simply anti.

Get used to it.

That pro-GOP and anti-GOP thing is the problem. It boils down to partisanship, Democrats versus Republicans. When the reality is that there are more than 2 sides to any issue. There are many other sides and normally neither of the two parties have the best solution, only the solution that best suits their party. And we remain in ignorant bliss. Take the refugee situation. Obama criticizes the GOP, the GOP criticizes Obama. Both sides staking out territory and let's forget about the reality that Obama has, in the past, suspended refugee processing when it appears that proper screening wasn't being done or that more than just Christians are being persecuted in ISIS territory and deserving of refugee status.

 

[pbrauer]

The two news links you provided exemplifies the problem with the liberal media, which falsely claimed that Carson compares refugees to rabid dogs - this is 100% false.

Just based on the titles of the two links you provided, they make the far more accurate claim of Caron's analogy, as well as the screening of refugees.

How do you square that to ABC News' "Carson compares immigrants to rabid dogs"?

I think you need to follow those links rather than read the titles.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

No he didn't. He compared processes, not the beings involved in the process.

It apparently isn't just the liberal media who is struggling with this. It's also our liberal posters.

"If there is a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you're probably not going to assume something good about that dog.. By the same token, we have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are, quite frankly.. And you're probably going to put your children out of the way. That doesn't mean that you hate all dogs.. We have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are. Quite frankly, who are the people who want to come in and hurt us and destroy us"

Replacing people with dogs/rabid dogs....

 

[CycloneWanderer]

"By the same token, we have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are, quite frankly. Who are the people who want to come in here and hurt us and want to destroy us?"

he literally said that......... he couldn't have been more clear if he just started screaming "theyre all dogs" at the top of his lungs. And considering carsons bigoted beliefs about muslims and non christians its not that big of a leap

Hell, that's a compliment for my wife. She likes the average dog 10x more than she likes the average person.

 

[tres borrachos]

"If there is a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you're probably not going to assume something good about that dog.. By the same token, we have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are, quite frankly.. And you're probably going to put your children out of the way. That doesn't mean that you hate all dogs.. We have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are. Quite frankly, who are the people who want to come in and hurt us and destroy us"

Replacing people with dogs/rabid dogs....

And he still didn't compare Muslims to rabid dogs. You didn't even read it apparently.

 

[tres borrachos]

Hell, that's a compliment for my wife. She likes the average dog 10x more than she likes the average person.

So do I.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

And he still didn't compare Muslims to rabid dogs. You didn't even read it apparently.

I never said anything about Muslims....

 

[tres borrachos]

I never said anything about Muslims....

No you didn't. You said "Refugees". Other idiotic posts said Muslims. Let me rephrase my post. And he still didn't compare refugees to rabid dogs.

 

[CycloneWanderer]

We tend to forget that analogical thinking is considered correlative with intelligence. Ever heard of the phrase: don't argue with stupid people?

A more concise description of the analogy presented by Carson would be the following

stray dogs : rabid dogs :: refugees : terrorists.

To a person who volunteers for a shelter and has fostered stray dogs, it isn't a perfect analogy but apt enough to get the point across.

 

[Peter King]

What's wrong with what Kimberly said? It's her opinion, and Obama has appeared very weak on terrorists, using stupid terminology like "setback" to describe the Paris attacks. She also isn't the only one who finds his constant complaining about the Republicans to be both tiresome and annoying. He does seem more focused on using harsh words against his political opponents in America than he does the world's enemy.

I disagree with her and with you. Obama is attacking terrorists left right and center. But in an environment where you have to be careful to make sure you do not hit innocent civilians one has to err on the side of caution.

Well, I think the constant whining about Obama is both highly irritating (but that is what the republicans have been doing ever since he was the presidential candidate in 2008) and also tiresome and counter productive. All we hear the republicans do is complain and do nothing. Work with Obama to solve something but that is not in the agenda of the republicans.

And again, words do not kill, bombs do and that is what is being thrown at the terrorists, criticism is what he says to republicans who do things that are counter productive and stupidly wrong. Like the governors telling they will not be accepting Syrian refugees when they do not have a leg to stand on. And you do know that even though he is president, he also is a politician and he has the right to tell his side of the story too? It is not just republicans who can say what they to say.

Sorry, but i just disagree with you.

 

[HowardBThiname]

So he compared refugees to "rabid dogs". In which he did. And your upset that the media is calling him out and presenting what occurred? I got an idea, maybe bigots shouldnt openly make bigoted comments.

Actually, he didn't, but if honesty isn't your thing - it's no skin off my nose. I'm not a Carson supporter, I just don't feel the need to lie out of some odd sense that he might actually get the nomination if the media were to represent the story honestly.

 

[tres borrachos]

I disagree with her and with you. Obama is attacking terrorists left right and center. But in an environment where you have to be careful to make sure you do not hit innocent civilians one has to err on the side of caution.

Well, I think the constant whining about Obama is both highly irritating (but that is what the republicans have been doing ever since he was the presidential candidate in 2008) and also tiresome and counter productive. All we hear the republicans do is complain and do nothing. Work with Obama to solve something but that is not in the agenda of the republicans.

And again, words do not kill, bombs do and that is what is being thrown at the terrorists, criticism is what he says to republicans who do things that are counter productive and stupidly wrong. Like the governors telling they will not be accepting Syrian refugees when they do not have a leg to stand on. And you do know that even though he is president, he also is a politician and he has the right to tell his side of the story too? It is not just republicans who can say what they to say.

Sorry, but i just disagree with you.

Not taking about his (useless failing) drone attacks. Neither was she. We're talking about his rhetoric.

Obama's no more interested in working with the Republicans than they are in working with him.

Nobody said or suggested Obama doesn't have a right to "tell his side of the story", either.

 

[HowardBThiname]

I disagree with her and with you. Obama is attacking terrorists left right and center. But in an environment where you have to be careful to make sure you do not hit innocent civilians one has to err on the side of caution.

Yes, he is attacking terrorists and I think we need to keep in mind that he was elected on a platform of NOT putting the US in another large Middle Eastern conflict. He's trying to represent the desires of the people who voted for him (not me) while minimizing the risk of ISIS.

And again, words do not kill, bombs do and that is what is being thrown at the terrorists, criticism is what he says to republicans who do things that are counter productive and stupidly wrong. Like the governors telling they will not be accepting Syrian refugees when they do not have a leg to stand on. And you do know that even though he is president, he also is a politician and he has the right to tell his side of the story too? It is not just republicans who can say what they to say.
.

Like I said, I didn't vote for him but if we are to maintain any shred of integrity, we have to respect the office of the presidency to some extent. Everyone has their own opinion, but if someone wants to condemn the way the President is handling things, they ought to at least include what they feel is the correct plan.

Personally, I don't want to see American boots on the ground anytime soon in Syria. I do think we should pullback now that Russia is in there. It's not our fight - not really. We don't need another quagmire.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

And he still didn't compare Muslims to rabid dogs. You didn't even read it apparently.

Ah, so your issue isn't just misunderstanding analogies, it also involves problems with context.

Good to know.

 

[Nilly]

How did you get that out of his post? That isn't what he said, and what you said is a lie. Carson didn't compare Muslims to dogs. The amount of dishonest posts in this thread is astounding.

What? Read again:

"In fact, he pointed out that he loved dogs, which, when taken in the same spirit, should tell the listener that he loves Muslims."

Not sure how you can get anything else out of that. Howard said that in the analogy Carson loves dogs, which is analogous to Carson loving Muslims. Dogs compared to Muslims. That's what Howard said anyway.

For the record re: Carsons comments, I don't think he compared refugees to rabid dogs. I think he compared terrorists to rabid dogs, and refugees to non-rabid dogs, who mwhich the terrorists/rabid dogs are hiding amongst.

Based on the amazingly dumb Liberal logic I'm seeing in this thread and from ABC news, if I compared the treatment of cancer to what a mechanic does to a car, I'm calling cancer a car.

Erm again, what? Comparing A and B doesn't mean I am literally calling A B. I can compare a Ferrari and a Ford with each other whilst being entirely aware that they are actually completely different objects. Carson isn't literally calling Muslims dogs. But using the two in an analogous manner is an awfully stupid and offensive comparison to make, particularly when it carries many further negative connotations.

 

[Peter King]

Not taking about his (useless failing) drone attacks. Neither was she. We're talking about his rhetoric.

Obama's no more interested in working with the Republicans than they are in working with him.

Nobody said or suggested Obama doesn't have a right to "tell his side of the story", either.

Well, yes, let us talk about rhetoric and the insane 8 year diatribe of republican attacks on Obama.

And yes, she was talking about fighting the terrorists and sadly I see only one side doing anything. All the other side of the isle does is whine and complain and obstruct.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

No you didn't. You said "Refugees". Other idiotic posts said Muslims. Let me rephrase my post. And he still didn't compare refugees to rabid dogs.

Actually, he didn't, but if honesty isn't your thing - it's no skin off my nose. I'm not a Carson supporter, I just don't feel the need to lie out of some odd sense that he might actually get the nomination if the media were to represent the story honestly.

What is this then?
"If there is a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you're probably not going to assume something good about that dog.. By the same token, we have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are, quite frankly.. And you're probably going to put your children out of the way. That doesn't mean that you hate all dogs.. We have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are. Quite frankly, who are the people who want to come in and hurt us and destroy us"

 

[Lord of Planar]

This lying liberal media is completely worthless. You might as well turn off the news, 'cause you already know you're not going to get the truth.

The lying liberal media lied again tonight. All over the airwaves. On practically every channel in existence.

"Carson compares immigrants to rabid dogs". That was the headline on the ABC Evening News. David Muir said that.

But I listened to what Carson actually said. He was making a statement about "stupid policy". He wasn't comparing anything to anything.

The lying liberal media utters a collective "gasp" every time they hear the word "immigrant". (And then the next word that comes out of their lying liberal mouths is "racist").

The lying liberal media is owned lock stock and barrel by their advertisers. They're not giving you the "news", they're telling you what their advertisers want you to hear.

They're certainly entirely devoid of credibility as a legitimate journalistic enterprise.

I hope this isn't a new revelation for you.

The media has been lying for decades.