PogueMoran
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 2,834
- Reaction score
- 331
- Location
- Northeast
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Yhis is you dodgng my question and my request for a credible source to back your assertions.
As I said:
You're going to have to do better than paraphrase from memory for any of this to mean anything.
And my question -- the one you did NOT answer -- was:
Isn't checking facts and challenging the statements of thosein government things the press is SUPPOSED to do?
You still have not addresses my post.But linking to fox wouldn't be a credible source goobie. You're calling what they do fact checking but that's not what they do when they need their own fact checking fact checked. Talking about non-existent death panels in a bill isn't fact checking. Talking about a non-existent death book isn't fact checking. Calling the guy a muslim isn't fact checking. Why don't you tell us which fact checking their news anchors do?
You still have not addresses my post.
One more time:
As I said:
You're going to have to do better than paraphrase from memory for any of this to mean anything.
And my question -- the one you did NOT answer -- was:
Isn't checking facts and challenging the statements of those in government things the press is SUPPOSED to do?
You still have not addresses my post.
One more time:
As I said:
You're going to have to do better than paraphrase from memory for any of this to mean anything.
And my question -- the one you did NOT answer -- was:
Isn't checking facts and challenging the statements of those in government things the press is SUPPOSED to do?
So are you saying that opinion shows that state things emphatically as being true but don't state that its just their opinion is totally okay with you?
why did the Fox story leave out relevant context from Dunn when they quoted her?
Here you go again repeating yourself as if you love hearing yourself speak. Again you haven't defined when Fox has been fact checking statements the government makes. When did they do that during the last administration? It seems they're selective. The press is supposed to do that but Fox doesn't.
I'm a little woried about fox news reporting on fox news.
Actuially no -- its me not letting you toss out red herrings in an attempt to change the subject.Here you go again repeating yourself as if you love hearing yourself speak.
Actuially no -- its me not letting you toss out red herrings in an attempt to change the subject.
YOU claimed that reporters and anchors said this and that -- you havent shown this to be true.
Since you have not shown this to be true, you have no basis for your assertion that FNC needs it fact checks checked.
Without any of that, you have nothing -- and nothing you very clearly have.
And even if you DID have someting, it doesnt change the fact that bu checking the facts in question, FNC was doing whatit is supposed to do.
FNC did its job, and The Administration took offense, blacklisting FNC in response -- and you have no problem with it.
The part where you try to change the subject from FNC doing its job bu fact-checking to (your unsupported claim of) FNC not doing its job previously? That's a red herring.Aww red herrings now. Which statement was a red herring? How was fox doing what it was supposed to be doing? Do you have proof of that? Or you're just saying it to see yourself write.
FNC did its job, and The Administration took offense, blacklisting FNC in response -- and you have no problem with it.
according to the link, Obama didn't go on Fox because Obama didn't respect the network.When Dunn was asked whether the president refused to accept interview requests from Fox because the White House sees the network as "a wing of the Republican party," the communications director responded: "Is this why he did not appear? The answer is yes."
source
Obama refused to appear on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace on Sept. 20, the day he appeared on five other Sunday shows. At the time, the White House characterized the snub as payback for the Fox Broadcast Network's decision not to air an Obama prime time appearance. But last weekend, Dunn blamed Fox News Channel's coverage of the administration for Obama's snub of Fox News Sunday.
"Is this why he did not appear?" Dunn said. "The answer is yes."
You only think that because when you see me you get such a hard-on that you BP drops and your brain goes all fuzzy.Looks like somebody has got goobie pegged. :rofl
The part where you try to change the subject from FNC doing its job bu fact-checking to (your unsupported claim of) FNC not doing its job previously? That's a red herring.
And so, even if you DID have someting, it doesnt change the fact that bu checking the facts in question, FNC was doing whatit is supposed to do.
FNC did its job, and The Administration took offense, blacklisting FNC in response -- and you have no problem with it.
You only think that because when you see me you get such a hard-on that you BP drops and your brain goes all fuzzy.
Look, if you're just going to lie about it, there's no sense in continuing the conversation.So you're going to generalize. Which statement of mine was a red herring? I didn't change the subject.
Yes, I did.You said they're supposed to fact check.
Aside from the fact that I said no such thing and tha you have not proven this to be the case -- this is the red herring. This is you diverting the issue away from what it is to something else.I pointed to several anchors out and out lying and not fact checking which you said you don't care about
Look, if you're just going to lie about it, there's no sense in continuing the conversation.
Right here, in your own post, is proof:
Yes, I did.
Youhave yet to agree to this.
Aside from the fact that I said no such thing and tha you have not proven this to be the case -- this is the red herring. This is you diverting the issue away from what it is to something else.
and even if you DID have someting, it doesnt change the fact that bu checking the facts in question, FNC was doing whatit is supposed to do.
That you CLAIM that FNC did not previously fact check certain other stories does not in any way change the fact that they DID fact-check this particular one, that them doing so was a perfectly legitimate thing for them to do as it is part of the job, and that The Administrations reaction is reprehensible.
Did you read the rest of my post?So you can't point out the red herring and you're just using words that you have no idea the meaning of.
Aside from the fact that I said no such thing and tha you have not proven this to be the case -- this is the red herring. This is you diverting the issue away from what it is to something else.
That you CLAIM that FNC did not previously fact check certain other stories does not in any way change the fact that they DID fact-check this particular one, that them doing so was a perfectly legitimate thing for them to do as it is part of the job, and that The Administrations reaction is reprehensible.
Your offer of a red herring.Proof of what?
This is a statement you have not yet supported, even after being asked to do so several times.That fox is supposed to fact check but doesn't
:shock:You already told me even if I gave you direct links that it wouldn't matter because it wouldn't change your partisan opinion.
according to the link, Obama didn't go on Fox because Obama didn't respect the network.
a different reality is portrayed in Fox's version of the story.
why did Fox create a misleading context for Dunn's answer, Goobieman?
I'm still amused they think this is somehow going to alleviate their problems. They are decreasing their audience and rallying loyal (or perhaps even passive) viewers against their administration by making them watch more Fox News. They shouldn't continue to focus this. Yes, make references over a period of time, but to make a campaign of it is getting them nowhere.
This blackout technique by the Democrats for the past couple of years seems so flat out stupid to me.
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?