Fox "News" ONCE AGAIN caught FAKING video: This time, Sarah Palin's book signing crowd, old campaign video
Taylor
And if MSNBC were to "accidentally" air footage of the barren post-
Hurricane Katrina streets of New Orleans with the David Shuster voice-
over: "Here's the outpour of demand for Palin's latest book signing.
As you can see, there's a sizable crowd waiting...."
Sarah would laugh at the "error". Mmm-hmmm.
===
Fox News Runs Old Palin Campaign Footage, Reports It As Book-Signing
Crowds [UPDATE]
First Posted: 11-18-09 05:38 PM | Updated: 11-19-09 11:15 AM
Read More: Fox News, Fox News Palin, Jon Stewart, Palin Fox News,
Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Fox News, Media News
Last week, Jon Stewart and The Daily Show caught Fox News' Sean
Hannity running old footage of September Tea Party crowds in an
attempt to make Michele Bachmann's smaller November Tea Party shindig
appear to be more well-attended than it was. Is Fox up to the same
tricks today? Faiz Shakir at ThinkProgress thinks so, and he pulls a
segment that seems to tout the crowds that greeted Sarah Palin on the
stump during the 2008 campaign as throngs that are gathering to
purchase Sarah Palin's book, Going Rogue.
In the clip below, watch as Fox anchor Gregg Jarrett describes
"pictures just coming into us" as "huge crowds" that have amassed
while Palin is "promoting her new book." The pictures that are
supposedly "just coming in" are actually year-old video from the
presidential campaign:
[WATCH]
For what it's worth, I think this appears to be little more than a
momentary disconnect between newsreader and news producer than a
conscious attempt to mislead. I am sure that Fox News is more than
aware that crowds are mainly gathering today at a mall in Michigan,
where Palin is expected to appear, and not at some rally that Palin
presided over today. Of course, the fact that Fox was caught
manipulating footage in a misleading manner is only going to spur
further suspicions when things like this happen.
MSNBC has also been reporting on Palin's book signing all day today.
It's not something that Fox is likely to have missed, and it looks a
little something like this:
[WATCH]
{{{skulduggerypleasant.org video goes here}}}
UPDATE: Fox has released a statement:
"This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script
and didn't alert the control room to update the video...There will be
an on-air explanation during Happening Now on Thursday."
Mark Silva, writing for the Chicago Tribune's The Swamp blog, reports
that "that it's highly like [sic] that serious disciplinary action
will be taken for those responsible behind the scenes in the control
room. News executives there consider this to have been a sloppy and
unnecessary error.'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/18/fox-news-runs-old-palin-c_n_362897.html
Jim Sumner
Error my ass, Fox is known to even invent fake stories for
propaganda such as that bogus paid twosome who appeared Obama election
night waving a Soviet Union flag with Fox cameras just "happening" to
be on the scene right when it happened. CLUE: Fox hired those two to
wave that flag to make propaganda against Obama smearing him as a
Communist.
nobody
Proof? Didn't think so.
Ubiquitous
>Error my ass, Fox is known to even invent fake stories for
>propaganda such as that bogus paid twosome who appeared Obama election
>night waving a Soviet Union flag with Fox cameras just "happening" to
>be on the scene right when it happened. CLUE: Fox hired those two to
>wave that flag to make propaganda against Obama smearing him as a
>Communist.
Troll O Meter
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
___________________________________________________
| | | | | | | | | | |
---------------------------------------------------
^
|
Ubiquitous
wrote:
><JimSum...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Error my ass, Fox is known to even invent fake stories for
>> propaganda such as that bogus paid twosome who appeared Obama election
>> night waving a Soviet Union flag with Fox cameras just "happening" to
>> be on the scene right when it happened. CLUE: Fox hired those two to
>> wave that flag to make propaganda against Obama smearing him as a
>> Communist.
>
>Proof? Didn't think so.
I bet he believes Nancy Pelosi's hysterical claims of seeing nazis at
last summer's tea parties, too.
--
It is simply breathtaking to watch the glee and abandon with which
the liberal media and the Angry Left have been attempting to turn
our military victory in Iraq into a second Vietnam quagmire. Too bad
for them, it's failing.
Jim Sumner
ex-Fox employees have stated that Fox makes up stories. Fox also
hired fake audience members for the Republican primary debates, one in
particular was featured in several debates and his role was as "Mr.
Undecided", another crowd member was hired to laugh at Ron Paul.
Here's another fake story Fox was caught doing. http://mediamatters.org/research/200410040006
Proof? Do think so.
Ubiquitous
>ex-Fox employees have stated that Fox makes up stories. Fox also
>hired fake audience members for the Republican primary debates, one in
>particular was featured in several debates and his role was as "Mr.
>Undecided", another crowd member was hired to laugh at Ron Paul.
>Here's another fake story Fox was caught doing.
>
>http://mediamatters.org/research/200410040006
In other words, another story from an Angry Left website with a
well-documented history of fabricating stories.
Dano
Of course not. You do not think at all. Fox handles that *for* you.
lorad
People need to realize that Fox is just the propaganda outlet for the
personal thoughts of Chairman Murdoch.
Taylor
> In article <l8ucg5hq6hbfarmpbsfa2d71krpp9rh...@4ax.com>, nob...@nowhere.com
> wrote:
>
> ><JimSummer...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> Error my ass, Fox is known to even invent fake stories for
> >> propaganda such as that bogus paid twosome who appeared Obama election
> >> night waving a Soviet Union flag with Fox cameras just "happening" to
> >> be on the scene right when it happened. CLUE: Fox hired those two to
> >> wave that flag to make propaganda against Obama smearing him as a
> >> Communist.
>
> >Proof? Didn't think so.
>
> I bet he believes Nancy Pelosi's hysterical claims of seeing nazis at
> last summer's tea parties, too.
>
Would you care to take a trip over to MediaMatters.org website or
MSNBC.com where you bring up video and/or text of Swastikas at Glenn
Beck's 9/12 Teabagger rallys????
Jim Sumner
From youtube:
Hahaha ok so here is the truth about that flag. There were these ultra-
conservative GW students who were all in the same dorm. One kid's
relatives actually fled from Russia during the pograms and gave the
kid a Soviet flag they had. Though the kid was very Republican, he
still kept the flag in the dorm room as a joke. When Obama won and
everyone ran down to the White House, this whole dorm room just sat in
their room all pissed off. That is when they got the idea go down
there and wave the flag.
the kid who brought the flag was a republican who was pissed that
obama won. he lived on my floor, and i was there. the cops eventually
removed the kids from teh scene for their own safety because it was
obvious the crowd was about to kick their faces in
so yea, fox is entirely full of shit.
Jim Sumner
I have another newsflash for you, Media Matters can't invent fake
former Fox employees especially not if they have the actual interviews
with them describing their time at Fox.
6sicks...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Anyone who has ever been in a TV studio and seen a switcher can tell
you that this is not a mistake, only a moron could make such a
mistake. Now, while I do not doubt that fox employs morons, it would
take a whole new level of moron to mistake a live feed from file
footage.
6sicks...@gmail.com
Provide your documentatino of them 'fabricating stories', you can put
it right here ->
We're waiting shit for brains.
record hunter
> Fox is known to even invent fake stories for
> propaganda such as that bogus paid twosome who appeared Obama election
> night waving a Soviet Union flag with Fox cameras just "happening" to
> be on the scene right when it happened. CLUE: Fox hired those two to
> wave that flag to make propaganda against Obama smearing him as a
> Communist.
Well, surprise, surprise, surprise.
nobody
Proof that Fox hired the two people to smear Obama is still missing...
Jim Sumner
> >Proof? Do think so.
>
> Proof that Fox hired the two people to smear Obama is still missing...
nobody
>relatives actually fled from Russia during? the pograms and gave the
>kid a Soviet flag they had. Though the kid was very Republican, he
>still kept the flag in the dorm room as a joke. When Obama won and
>everyone ran down to the White House, this whole dorm room just sat in
>their room all pissed off. That is when they got the idea go down
>there and wave the flag.
>
>the kid who brought the flag was a republican who was pissed that
>obama won. he lived on my floor, and i was there. the cops eventually
>removed the kids from teh scene for their own? safety because it was
>obvious the crowd was about to kick their faces in
>
>so yea, fox is entirely full of shit.
Proof that Fox hired anyone to smear Obama *still* missing.
Dano
They didn't need to. They had them all on staff already. The memos from
Murdoch to toe the "party line" have been widely seen. Just because you
wear those neo-con blinders is only your own damn fault. The evidence is
abundant. I see no need to force feed it to someone so in denial.
Jim Sumner
You don't decide what truth is:
From youtube:
Hahaha ok so here is the truth about that flag. There were these
ultra-
conservative GW students who were all in the same dorm. One kid's
relatives actually fled from Russia during the pograms and gave the
kid a Soviet flag they had. Though the kid was very Republican, he
still kept the flag in the dorm room as a joke. When Obama won and
everyone ran down to the White House, this whole dorm room just sat in
their room all pissed off. That is when they got the idea go down
there and wave the flag.
the kid who brought the flag was a republican who was pissed that
obama won. he lived on my floor, and i was there. the cops eventually
removed the kids from teh scene for their own safety because it was
Jim Sumner
The burden of proof is on the one making the claim thus Fox has to
prove those were real protestors since Fox's agenda is anti-Obama
right from the start therefore biased against Obama. Fox failed to
provide interviews with those protestors after the video thus there's
no evidence they were legitimate Obama supporters. Fox is a Republican
network and hence automatically anti-Obama therefore unless their
findings are validated by a neutral 3rd party they cannot be trusted.
You have to prove those were real protestors.
nobody
wrote:
Blah, blah, blah *still* nothing to back up your delusional nonsense.
>
nobody
> The burden of proof is on the one making the claim thus Fox has to
>prove those were real protestors since Fox's agenda is anti-Obama
>right from the start therefore biased against Obama. Fox failed to
>provide interviews with those protestors after the video thus there's
>no evidence they were legitimate Obama supporters. Fox is a Republican
>network and hence automatically anti-Obama therefore unless their
>findings are validated by a neutral 3rd party they cannot be trusted.
>
> You have to prove those were real protestors.
Does all that spinning make you dizzy?
Dano
I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help you with
the big words.
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new_b_318338.html
Jim Sumner
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:28:18 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >>>>> think so.
>
> >>>> Proof that Fox hired the two people to smear Obama is still
> >>>> missing...
>
> >>> From youtube:
>
> >>> Hahaha ok so here is the truth about that flag. There were these
> >>> ultra-
> >>> conservative GW students who were all in the same dorm. One kid's
> >>> relatives actually fled from Russia during? the pograms and gave the
> >>> kid a Soviet flag they had. Though the kid was very Republican, he
> >>> still kept the flag in the dorm room as a joke. When Obama won and
> >>> everyone ran down to the White House, this whole dorm room just sat
> >>> in their room all pissed off. That is when they got the idea go down
> >>> there and wave the flag.
>
> >>> the kid who brought the flag was a republican who was pissed that
> >>> obama won. he lived on my floor, and i was there. the cops eventually
> >>> removed the kids from teh scene for their own? safety because it was
> >>> obvious the crowd was about to kick their faces in
>
> >>> so yea, fox is entirely full of shit.
>
> >> Proof that Fox hired anyone to smear Obama *still* missing.
>
> >They didn't need to. They had them all on staff already. The memos from
> >Murdoch to toe the "party line" have been widely seen. Just because you
> >wear those neo-con blinders is only your own damn fault. The evidence is
> >abundant. I see no need to force feed it to someone so in denial.
>
> Blah, blah, blah *still* nothing to back up your delusional nonsense.
>
>
You have nothing to back up that they were legitimate Democrats. Any
media can lie, Saddam Hussein invented fake villages where everyone
was happy for foreign visitors to come look at and be duped. They mere
fact that something appears on TV doesn't prove it is true.
Jim Sumner
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:57:33 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
>
>
Does Rush Limbaugh's semen make your stomach hurt?
nobody
Can't support the claim that they are paid by Fox News I see.
nobody
wrote:
"Mediamatters"???????? You're joking.
>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
Ditto.
>
>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
smear Obama.
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new_b_318338.html
An editorial without content. Did you even try here?
Marketing for a video. You're getting colder.
Blog with no actual content.
All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
typical of the left...
>
nobody
So you *can't* back up the claim about Fox News -- why didn't you just
say so?
TaxPayingAmericansAreNever...@america.elite
invited to the Party but ALWAYS sent the bill.
THAT is what America is. Bullshit with a Happy Face.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Would-be reality TV stars crash Obama party
Couple penetrates White House security to get into state dinner
By Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts
updated 9:15 p.m. CT, Wed., Nov . 25, 2009
A couple of aspiring reality-TV stars from Northern Virginia appear to
have crashed the White House�s state dinner Tuesday night, penetrating
layers of security with no invitation to mingle with the likes of Vice
President Biden and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.
Tareq and Michaele Salahi � polo-playing socialites known for a bitter
family feud over a Fauquier County winery and their possible roles in
the forthcoming �The Real Housewives of Washington� � were seen
arriving at the White House and later posted on Facebook photos of
themselves with VIPs at the elite gathering.
�Honored to be at the White House for the state dinner in honor of
India with President Obama and our First Lady!� one of them wrote on
their joint Facebook page at 9:08 p.m.
Story continues below ?advertisement | your ad here
But a White House official said the couple were not invited to the
dinner, not included on the official guest list and never seated at a
table in the South Lawn tent.
A woman describing herself as a publicist for the Salahis denied that
they were interlopers. Pressed for details, Mahogany Jones sent a
statement saying simply: �The Salahis were honored to be a part of
such a prestigious event.... They both had a wonderful time.�
In same room with world leaders
While the White House offered no official explanation, it appears to
be the first time in modern history that anyone has crashed a White
House state dinner. The uninvited guests were in the same room as
President Obama, first lady Michelle Obama and Indian Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh, although it is unknown whether they met the Obamas and
the guest of honor.
�Everyone who enters the White House grounds goes through
magnetometers and several other levels of screenings,� said Ed
Donovan, a spokesman for the Secret Service. �That was the case with
the state dinner last night. No one was under any risk or threat.�
www.facebook.com
Vice President Joe Biden is seen with Michaele Salahi in a photo
posted on a Facebook page after the White House dinner Tuesday night.
Donovan said a preliminary internal investigation Wednesday identified
�a Secret Service checkpoint which did not follow proper procedure to
ensure these two individuals were on the invited guest list.� He
declined to give further details. An administration official said the
White House will conduct its own review.
The Salahis, both in their 40s, showed up about halfway through the
guest arrivals. A Marine announced their names, and the couple � he in
a tux, she in a striking red and gold lehenga (traditional Indian
formalwear) � swept pass reporters and photographers, stopping several
times to pose for pictures. They then walked into the White House
lower hallway, where they mingled with guests on the red carpet before
heading up to the cocktail reception in the East Room.
Later, they posted pictures that seem to chart their course through
the night: Michaele posing with Marines outside near the White House
doors, and with Katie Couric and Rep. Ed Royce (R-Calif.) inside the
mansion. In the East Room, the Salahis both cozied up to D.C. Mayor
Adrian Fenty and his wife, Michelle.
Photos with Emanuel, Biden
But the best was yet to come: Once inside the dinner tent, they got
pictures that appeared to show them with ABC�s Robin Roberts,
Bollywood composer AR Rahman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi, Obama Chief of
Staff Emanuel (identified as �Ron� in the couple�s Facebook photo
caption) and two with a grinning vice president. The photos end there
� no shots of the Salahis sitting at a table, their seatmates or the
post-dinner entertainment.
How could it happen? A former White House senior staffer � who more
than a decade ago encountered a crasher at one of the executive
mansion�s less-fancy parties � offered this theory:
A savvy pair of crashers, dressed to the nines, might arrive on foot
at the visitors� entrance, announce their names � then express shock
and concern when the security detail at the gate failed to find them
on the guest list. On a rainy night like Tuesday, with a crowd of
300-plus arriving, security might have lost track of or granted a
modicum of sympathy to a pair who certainly looked as though they
belonged there. If their IDs didn�t send up any red flags in the
screening process, they would be sent through the magnetometers and
into the White House.
And yet, the former staffer noted: Someone from the White House social
office should have been posted at the guest entrance with the guards.
Timeline
60 years of White House state dinners
At his first big White House dinner, President Barack Obama welcomes
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Here�s a look at other state
dinners over the past 60 years.
Once visitors were in, no one necessarily would ask them for further
identification. They could check their coats, give their names to the
Marine on duty, walk past reporters and into the lower hallway where
guests picked up their table assignments. They would pass the junior
staffers handing out seating cards and walk on up the stairs for
cocktails in the East Room.
Later, all guests were directed to head for the dinner tent on the
South Lawn. Facebook photos suggest that the Salahis walked into the
tent; it�s unclear when they left. Reporters were cleared from the
entryway by the time dinner seating got under way. There is no
security checkpoint to leave the grounds.
Date with reality TV?
The Salahis, longtime fixtures in local horse-country society, have
recently seemed destined for national fame via reality TV. Michaele, a
striking model-thin blonde who used to be a Redskins cheerleader, has
been widely reported to be in contention as one of the �Real
Housewives� in the forthcoming D.C. edition of the hit Bravo cable
series. Although Bravo has not officially finalized its cast, its
cameras have followed the couple at numerous parties � including the
�America�s Polo Cup� held on the Mall in September, part of a series
of tournaments the Salahis founded a few years ago.
Abby Greensfelder, head of the local production team Half Yard
Productions, referred questions about the Salahis to Bravo. A Bravo
representative declined to comment.
More about the big event
Stars come out for White House state dinner
Even before their brush with reality TV fame, the couple had gained
some notoriety for a long-running feud with Tareq�s parents, Dirgham
and Corinne Salahi, over control of the family�s Oasis Winery in Hume,
Va. Last year, Tareq accused his mother�s attorney of punching him;
the lawyer was found not guilty. Court records show that Oasis filed
for bankruptcy in February, with Tareq listed as �debtor designee.� A
note on the winery�s Web site Wednesday promised a reopening for
business in 2010.
The America�s Polo Cup has also endured controversy, last year drawing
a lawsuit from a Middleburg caterer over alleged non-payment. That
suit remains unresolved.
Hours before the White House denied that the Salahis were legitimate
guests, The Post asked the couple via Facebook how they happened to
attend the dinner. Tareq responded: �India is the challenger in the
America�s Polo Cup World Championships June 11/12 2010, and they are
very excited in this first ever cultural connection being hosted on
the DC National Mall since Polo is one of the primary sports in
India.�
When pressed about why they did not appear on the official list, he
added, �it was last-minute attending.�
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34157390/ns/politics-washington_post
Mark Lindamood
> Proof? Do think so.
Does Media Matters ever investigate the reporting of practices of,
say, MSNBC? Or does MM just have a single-minded hate-on for Fox News?
Dano
>>
>> Does Rush Limbaugh's semen make your stomach hurt?
>
> Can't support the claim that they are paid by Fox News I see.
See! You failed to answer the question. There is the proof!
Dano
Just as I thought. You couldn't find anyone to read to you. You're a
pathetic, sorry little twit.
Happy Thanksgiving. Glad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
<PLONK>
cop welfare
>
> - Show quoted text -
i suppose fox is such a standout case that it takes up all their time
and energy.
maybe they should take on extra help.
i know how it is.
i sympathise.
i despise domestic so-called conservatives so much that i hardly have
time for the juntas.
nobody
wrote:
Always love the leftie loon. They make claims, provide cites that
don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>
nobody
So the answer would be "no" then....
nobody
wrote:
Another childish lib...whodda thunk it?
>
>
Jim Sumner
You can't prove that they weren't paid by Fox or the GOP. Again I
mention the absolute FACT that just because something appears on TV
doesn't make it authentic. Fox failed to provide followup interviews
with those individuals thus making the hoax factor extremely likely.
Jim Sumner
You can't prove it was real, again the mere fact that it appears on
TV does not make it authentic.
Jim Sumner
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:10 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >nobody wrote:
> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:58:42 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help
> >>> you with the big words.
>
> >>>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
>
> >> "Mediamatters"???????? You're joking.
>
> >>>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
>
> >> Ditto.
>
> >>>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
>
> >> Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
> >> smear Obama.
>
>
> >> An editorial without content. Did you even try here?
>
> >>>http://www.outfoxed.org/
>
> >> Marketing for a video. You're getting colder.
>
>
> >> Blog with no actual content.
>
>
> >> All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
> >> typical of the left...
>
> >Just as I thought. You couldn't find anyone to read to you. You're a
> >pathetic, sorry little twit.
>
> >Happy Thanksgiving. Glad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
>
> ><PLONK>
>
> Always love the leftie loon. They make claims, provide cites that
> don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>
>
The original video itself is a CLAIM by Fox, that's what you fail to
understand.
cop welfare
>
> - Show quoted text -
"i suppose fox is such a standout case that it takes up all their (MM)
time
and energy.
maybe they should take on extra help.
i know how it is.
i sympathise.
i despise domestic so-called conservatives so much that i hardly have
time for the juntas. " - cw
"So the answer would be "no" then....- ?" - the enlightened personage
i leave that to you.
i don't find myself consistently fascinated by ANYONE'S bs, including
yer own.
Jim Sumner
The election night Soviet flag crap was BS and the so-called Obama
supporters captured on camera was never proven. Fox carried out no
followup interview with those people, etc.....No proof they weren't
hired by the GOP or Fox.
Tiger...@holeintwo.com
>http://www.dlisted.com/node/35002
>
>Remember Rachel Uchitel? She's the one that Star Magazine said was doing illegal
>fucky times with the very-married David Boreanaz? Well, it looks like Rachel's
>bull dozer vagina is now wreaking havoc on Tiger Wood's picture perfect home.
>
>According to the National Enquirer (insert obligatory side-eye here), Tiger has
>been stepping out on his wife of six years and his two children. Sources say
>that Tiger is knocked balls into Rachel Uchitel's hole.
>
>Rachel's friends say that she's met up with him in Australia, Los Angeles and
>Las Vegas. When they aren't screwing on the down low, they are humping each
>other through text messages. One friend added, �Rachel told me, �I�m having an
>affair with Tiger Woods. We�re in love!� She even read me text messages Tiger
>sent her that said �I love you, babe. It�s always going to be just you and me.
>They were constantly sexting. Tiger asked what she was wearing, what did she
>want him to do to her, what did she want to do to him. I reminded Rachel that he
>was married, and she said �Big fucking deal! It�s Tiger Woods! I don�t care
>about his wife! We�re in love.� Her nickname for Tiger is Bear.�
>
>The Enquirer followed Rachel to a hotel in Australia where Tiger was staying.
>Apparently, they watched her take the elevator up to Tiger's VIP suite in the
>sky. When they asked Rachel about it, she lied at first, but then she said she
>was there "on business." Yeah, ho business.
>
>Tiger's lawyer denied the affair, but did say that the two have met before at a
>club or something.
>
>This Rachel trick is no joke! Does homegirl have Star Maps tattooed on her labia
>lips? Bitch is turning star fucking into a full-time job and she's determined to
>be Employee of the Year. Seriously, it looks like Sienna Miller has just been
>replaced as every wife's pubic (typo and it fits) enemy #1!
>
>via Celebitchy
>http://www.celebitchy.com/82395/enquirer_tiger_woods_has_been_having_an_affair_since_june/
It gets better...
Police chief: Woods' wife helped after accident
By DOUG FERGUSON, AP Golf Writer Doug Ferguson, Ap Golf Writer 1 hr 9
mins ago
Tiger Woods was injured early Friday when he lost control of his SUV
outside his Florida mansion, and a local police chief said Woods' wife
used a golf club to smash out the back window to help get him out.
The world's No. 1 golfer was treated and released from a hospital in
good condition, his spokesman said. The Florida Highway Patrol said
Woods' vehicle hit a fire hydrant and a tree in his neighbor's yard
after he pulled out of his driveway at 2:25 a.m.
Windermere police chief Daniel Saylor told The Associated Press that
officers found the 33-year-old PGA star lying in the street with his
wife, Elin, hovering over him.
"She was frantic, upset," Saylor said in a briefing Friday night. "It
was her husband laying on the ground."
She told officers she was in the house when she heard the accident and
"came out and broke the back window with a golf club," he said, adding
that the front-door windows were not broken and that "the door was
probably locked."
"She supposedly got him out and laid him on the ground," he said. "He
was in and out of consciousness when my guys got there."
Saylor said Woods had lacerations to his upper and lower lips, and
blood in his mouth; officers treated Woods for about 10 minutes until
an ambulance arrived. Woods was conscious enough to speak, he said.
"He was mumbling, but didn't say anything coherent," Saylor said.
The Florida Highway Patrol said alcohol was not involved, although the
accident remains under investigation and charges could be filed.
Woods was alone in his 2009 Cadillac when he pulled out of his
driveway from his mansion at Isleworth, a gated waterfront community
just outside Orlando, the patrol said.
Woods' injuries were described as serious in the patrol's report,
though his spokesman, Glenn Greenspan, issued a statement that Woods
was treated and released.
Left unanswered was where Woods was going at that hour. Greenspan and
agent Mark Steinberg said there would be no comment beyond the short
statement of the accident posted on Woods' Web site.
Saylor said his responding officers did not hear anything about an
alleged argument between Woods and his wife.
"Right now we believe this is a traffic crash. We don't believe it is
domestic issue," patrol spokesman Sgt. Kim Montes said.
Woods, coming off a two-week trip to China and Australia earlier this
month, is host of the Chevron World Challenge in Thousand Oaks,
Calif., which starts Thursday. He is scheduled to have his press
conference Tuesday afternoon at Sherwood Country Club. Steinberg said
he did not know if Woods planned to play next week.
The Florida Highway Patrol said tapes of the 911 call won't be
released until they can be reviewed, probably Monday at the earliest.
The accident report was not released until nearly 12 hours after Woods
was injured. Montes said the accident did not meet the criteria of a
serious crash, and the FHP only put out a press release because of
inquiries from local media.
Montes said the patrol reports injuries as serious if they require
more than minor medical attention. Air bags in the SUV did not deploy.
Two troopers tried to talk to Woods on Friday evening, but his wife
said he was sleeping and they agreed to come back Saturday, Montes
said.
She said charges could be filed if there was a clear traffic
violation, although troopers still do not know what caused Woods' SUV
to hit the hydrant and the tree.
Damage to the front of Woods' SUV was described as "medium" by Saylor.
"Not real extensive, but not real light," he said.
Woods rarely faces such private scrutiny, even as perhaps the most
famous active athlete in the world.
He usually makes news only because of what he can do with a golf club.
Few other athletes have managed to keep their private lives so
guarded, or have a circle of friends so airtight when it comes to life
off the course.
His wife was awarded a $183,250 settlement and an apology from an
Irish magazine that published a fake nude photo of her, and Woods
received a $1.6 million settlement in a lawsuit against the builder of
his yacht � named Privacy � for using his name and photos of the boat
as promotional material.
Woods is approaching $100 million in career earnings on the PGA Tour,
and Forbes magazine reported that combined with endorsements,
appearance fees and golf course design, he has become the first
athlete to top $1 billion.
Woods' $2.4 million home is part of an exclusive subdivision near
Orlando, a community set on an Arnold Palmer-designed golf course and
a chain of small lakes. The neighborhood, which is fortified with high
brick walls and has its own security force, is home to CEOs and other
sports stars such as the NBA's Shaquille O'Neal.
Woods, who has won 82 times around the world and 14 majors, attended
the Stanford-Cal football game last Saturday, where he tossed the coin
at the start of the game and was inducted into Stanford's sports Hall
of Fame at halftime.
He won six times this year after missing eight months recovering from
reconstructive surgery on his left knee. Even though he failed to win
a major, Woods said he considered this a successful year because he
did not know how his knee would respond.
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-So your saying she chased him out of the house with the gulf club
and as he was pulling away she smashed the back window and when he
looked back to see what was broken he drove off the road and into the
tree?
H8N S8N
Tiger Woods: Injuries Caused by Wife, Not SUV
http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/28/tiger-woods-elin-nordegren-fight-accident-suv-lacerations/
Tiger Woods did not suffer facial lacerations from a car accident.
They were inflicted by his wife, Elin Nordegren -- according to a
conversation Woods had Friday after the accident.
Mark Lindamood
Where's the proof that they *were* hired by the GOP or Fox?
rpbc
> TMZ says:
> Tiger Woods: Injuries Caused by Wife, Not SUV
>
>
> Tiger Woods did not suffer facial lacerations from a car accident.
> They were inflicted by his wife, Elin Nordegren -- according to a
> conversation Woods had Friday after the accident.
rpbc:
There goes his concentration....
Weatherman
> TMZ says:
> Tiger Woods: Injuries Caused by Wife, Not SUV
>
>
> Tiger Woods did not suffer facial lacerations from a car accident.
> They were inflicted by his wife, Elin Nordegren -- according to a
> conversation Woods had Friday after the accident.
WM-
This could really get thicker if they find out she took the club to
his ass. Maybe before or after he got out of the car. She was found
hovering over him. Did she have the club in hand?
At any rate if he is smart he will cover her ass on this for many
reasons.
nobody
That's the point..there isn't any. Of course that doesn't stop the
lib loon from ranting on.
nobody
That's not the way debating works. The initial claim was that they
were paid by Fox. The fact that no one is able to provide a credible
cite of that claim and instead shift the burden to prove that they
weren't paid by Fox speaks of the typical dishonesty of the left.
nobody
<JimSum...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Nov 27, 11:49嚙窮m, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:10 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >nobody wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:58:42 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >>> I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help
>> >>> you with the big words.
>>
>> >>>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
>>
>> >> "Mediamatters"???????? 嚙磐ou're joking.
>>
>> >>>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
>>
>> >> Ditto.
>>
>> >>>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
>>
>> >> Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
>> >> smear Obama.
>>
>> >>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new...
>>
>> >> An editorial without content. 嚙瘩id you even try here?
>>
>> >>>http://www.outfoxed.org/
>>
>> >> Marketing for a video. 嚙磐ou're getting colder.
>>
>> >>>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/10/22/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-have-c...
>>
>> >> Blog with no actual content.
>>
>> >>>http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/11/11/fox-news-fair-balanc...
>>
>> >> All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
>> >> typical of the left...
>>
>> >Just as I thought. 嚙磐ou couldn't find anyone to read to you. 嚙磐ou're a
>> >pathetic, sorry little twit.
>>
>> >Happy Thanksgiving. 嚙瘦lad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
>>
>> ><PLONK>
>>
>> Always love the leftie loon. 嚙確hey make claims, provide cites that
>> don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>>
>>
>
>
> The original video itself is a CLAIM by Fox, that's what you fail to
>understand.
Fox News claimed they paid someone? I must have missed that.
Jim Sumner
That is the way debating works, the story and video itself is a
claim by Fox that they have to prove is real. To do so they should
have produced followup interviews with those individuals after the
event, they did not thus it was never proven to be factual. Fox is
automatically held suspect in any information involving Obama or Obama
supporters since they are a Republican network and this ultimately
increases the burden of PROOF Fox must obtain for anyone to accept
their work as authentic. That is how debating works, you can't make
the rules, you can't declare something as FACT simply because your
little partisan GOP cheerleader bitch Fox network shines a camera on
something. On a side note you are forgetting that a man once dressed
up in a Bigfoot costume to make a video hoax several decades ago,
VIDEO itself is as subject to fraud as as any other form of media.
Jim Sumner
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:27:22 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
>
>
> >On Nov 27, 11:49 am, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:10 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >nobody wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:58:42 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >>> I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help
> >> >>> you with the big words.
>
> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
>
>
> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
>
> >> >> Ditto.
>
> >> >>>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
>
> >> >> Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
> >> >> smear Obama.
>
> >> >>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new...
>
>
> >> >>>http://www.outfoxed.org/
>
> >> >> Marketing for a video. You're getting colder.
>
> >> >>>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/10/22/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-have-c...
>
> >> >> Blog with no actual content.
>
> >> >>>http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/11/11/fox-news-fair-balanc...
>
> >> >> All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
> >> >> typical of the left...
>
> >> >pathetic, sorry little twit.
>
> >> >Happy Thanksgiving. Glad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
>
> >> ><PLONK>
>
> >> Always love the leftie loon. They make claims, provide cites that
> >> don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>
> > The original video itself is a CLAIM by Fox, that's what you fail to
> >understand.
>
> Fox News claimed they paid someone? I must have missed that.
Fox claimed those were legitimate Obama supporters, you must have
missed that. Fox didn't prove their claim thus the story itself is
false. Again Sherlock, the mere fact that it appeared on video or TV
doesn't make it real. Saddam Hussein use to have his security forces
dress up as civilians to produce propaganda of Saddam loving the
inhabitants in the countryside, and this video would appear on Iraqi
TV, that it was shown on TV didn't make them legitimate civilians.
For decades there was this old woman who claimed she was the Tsar's
daughter Anastasia and she appeared on TV numerous times claiming
such. In 1991 the real Anastasia's bones were found in Russia thus
proving that the fake Anastasia had been lying all those years despite
appearing on your oh so holy and sacred truthful video and TV.
P.S., you've obviously lost this debate, you've had your ass handed
to you, now sit down and shut up.
Jim Sumner
Where's the proof they weren't?
Jim Sumner
During the 2008 Republican Convention the GOP hired young college
Republican males to constantly run up and and down the aisles so that
this would be seen on TV to make it look like a more excited and
bigger crowd. Perhaps you've never heard of a little thing called
propaganda? Distortion and prearrangement of video scenarios is one of
the greatest forms of media propaganda. And who are you kidding? If a
lone guy showed up a Palin rally wearing a swastika t-shirt you'd be
the first person to claim he had been hired by the Democrats to smear
the GOP. You are a phony.
Jim Sumner
>
>
>
> >On Nov 27, 11:49 am, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:10 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >nobody wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:58:42 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >>> I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help
> >> >>> you with the big words.
>
> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
>
>
> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
>
> >> >> Ditto.
>
> >> >>>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
>
> >> >> Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
> >> >> smear Obama.
>
> >> >>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new...
>
>
> >> >>>http://www.outfoxed.org/
>
> >> >> Marketing for a video. You're getting colder.
>
> >> >>>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/10/22/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-have-c...
>
> >> >> Blog with no actual content.
>
> >> >>>http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/11/11/fox-news-fair-balanc...
>
> >> >> All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
> >> >> typical of the left...
>
> >> >pathetic, sorry little twit.
>
> >> >Happy Thanksgiving. Glad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
>
> >> ><PLONK>
>
> >> Always love the leftie loon. They make claims, provide cites that
> >> don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>
> > The original video itself is a CLAIM by Fox, that's what you fail to
> >understand.
>
> Fox News claimed they paid someone? I must have missed that.
If a lone guy showed up at a Palin rally wearing a swastika t-shirt
Mark Lindamood
This is what you call "evidence"? Offering one unsupported claim to
back up another unsupported claim, then topping it off with name-
calling?
Are there any adults on your side of the ideological divide?
Jim Sumner
The Fox video itself is an unsupported claim. Where were the
followup interviews? What were their names? Fox gave us none of that,
a short 10 second video and then that was the end of the
investigation. We are expected to believe that Fox just happened to
conveniently be RIGHT THERE when a very unusual event takes place as
two people are carrying a Soviet flag (how many Americans own Soviet
flags?).......the whole thing smelled totally bogus from the beginning
and perhaps many Democrats aren't aware that Fox pulled this piece of
media propaganda so they've failed to respond with a counterattack,
but I'm responding and calling the Fox video bullshit from start to
finish.
Mark Lindamood
That's not how logic works, dummy.
Jim Sumner
Yes it does. The video itself is a claim that Fox failed to prove.
Jim Sumner
In case you haven't noticed, since Fox has not provided us with
their names or conducted interviews with them after the initial video,
the viewers are not allowed to investigate the story further which is
obviously the way Fox wants it because they know those people were GOP
plants.
Jim Sumner
This rule of logic: The more controversial the matter, generally
speaking, the more evenly is the burden of proof shared by all sides;
and the more extreme or unusual one side of an argument is, the
greater its burden of proof.
It is not extreme or unusual to suggest that a Republican TV
network would manufacture anti-Democrat propaganda. Therefore, the
burden of proof is on FOX to prove that those were actual Obama
supporters which Fox failed to do.
Case Closed.
Mark Lindamood
You just pile it up, don't you? If your argumentum ad ignorantiam
fallacies satisfy you, enjoy yourself.
nobody
A delusional leftie speaks...
> the story and video itself is a
>claim by Fox that they have to prove is real.
If they produced a story and footage, their burden well on its way to
being met. You haven't done anything in the way of meeting yours.
>To do so they should
>have produced followup interviews with those individuals after the
>event,
I must have missed where that rule is written. Can you cite that?
> they did not thus it was never proven to be factual. Fox is
>automatically held suspect in any information involving Obama or Obama
>supporters since they are a Republican network and this ultimately
>increases the burden of PROOF Fox must obtain for anyone to accept
>their work as authentic. That is how debating works, you can't make
>the rules, you can't declare something as FACT simply because your
>little partisan GOP cheerleader bitch Fox network shines a camera on
>something. On a side note you are forgetting that a man once dressed
>up in a Bigfoot costume to make a video hoax several decades ago,
>VIDEO itself is as subject to fraud as as any other form of media.
Blah, blah, blah. There was a claim made here that Fox hired people
to smear Obama. I've been waiting for even a spec of proof. Nothing
has been provided except for an attempt at burden shifting. Here's
the claim from above:
"CLUE: Fox hired those two to>wave that flag to make propaganda
against Obama smearing him as a Communist."
Do you believe this claim and can support it or will you condemn it as
being baseless?
nobody
<JimSum...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Nov 29, 10:42ļæ½am, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:27:22 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>>
>>
>>
>> <JimSummer...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 27, 11:49ļæ½am, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:10 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >nobody wrote:
>> >> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:58:42 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help
>> >> >>> you with the big words.
>>
>> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
>>
>> >> >> "Mediamatters"???????? ļæ½You're joking.
>>
>> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
>>
>> >> >> Ditto.
>>
>> >> >>>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
>>
>> >> >> Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
>> >> >> smear Obama.
>>
>> >> >>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new...
>>
>> >> >> An editorial without content. ļæ½Did you even try here?
>>
>> >> >>>http://www.outfoxed.org/
>>
>> >> >> Marketing for a video. ļæ½You're getting colder.
>>
>> >> >>>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/10/22/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-have-c...
>>
>> >> >> Blog with no actual content.
>>
>> >> >>>http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/11/11/fox-news-fair-balanc...
>>
>> >> >> All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
>> >> >> typical of the left...
>>
>> >> >Just as I thought. ļæ½You couldn't find anyone to read to you. ļæ½You're a
>> >> >pathetic, sorry little twit.
>>
>> >> >Happy Thanksgiving. ļæ½Glad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
>>
>> >> ><PLONK>
>>
>> >> Always love the leftie loon. ļæ½They make claims, provide cites that
>> >> don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>>
>> > ļæ½The original video itself is a CLAIM by Fox, that's what you fail to
>> >understand.
>>
>> Fox News claimed they paid someone? ļæ½I must have missed that.
>
>
> Fox claimed those were legitimate Obama supporters, you must have
>missed that.
Did Fox provide a story, yes or no? Do you demand the same thing from
all networks and newspapers?
>Fox didn't prove their claim thus the story itself is
>false.
The claim here was that Fox News hired people to smear Obama. Since
that is not what the story was, that is an independent claim. Can you
support it or not?
> Again Sherlock, the mere fact that it appeared on video or TV
>doesn't make it real. Saddam Hussein use to have his security forces
>dress up as civilians to produce propaganda of Saddam loving the
>inhabitants in the countryside, and this video would appear on Iraqi
>TV, that it was shown on TV didn't make them legitimate civilians.
Again, do you demand the same level of evidence from all networks and
papers or just from sources you don't agree with?
nobody
Since I've never done anything of the sort, the comment above shows
your entire problem: you just assume anything you don't agree with is
a lie and anything you agree with is the truth.
nobody
Around here, that's what passes for proof to the leftie loon.
>
>Are there any adults on your side of the ideological divide?
Clearly not.
Jim Sumner
>
> read more »
Wrong, stories and footage can be fabricated. During WWII the
Japanese media proclaimed victories in battles they had actually lost.
Sorry, Fox failed to prove themselves, case dismissed.
Jim Sumner
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:06:48 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
>
>
> >On Nov 29, 10:42 am, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:27:22 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
> >> <JimSummer...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:10 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >nobody wrote:
> >> >> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:58:42 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >>> I sincerely hope you can find someone to read these to you and help
> >> >> >>> you with the big words.
>
> >> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200911170001
>
>
> >> >> >>>http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911230038
>
> >> >> >> Ditto.
>
> >> >> >>>http://www.culturevulture.net/Movies/Outfoxed.htm
>
> >> >> >> Nothing about Fox News hiring people to protest or hired people to
> >> >> >> smear Obama.
>
> >> >> >>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/memo-to-the-media-fox-new...
>
>
> >> >> >>>http://www.outfoxed.org/
>
> >> >> >> Marketing for a video. You're getting colder.
>
> >> >> >>>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/10/22/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-have-c...
>
> >> >> >> Blog with no actual content.
>
> >> >> >>>http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2009/11/11/fox-news-fair-balanc...
>
> >> >> >> All these "cites" and nothing to back up the original claims -- how
> >> >> >> typical of the left...
>
> >> >> >pathetic, sorry little twit.
>
> >> >> >Happy Thanksgiving. Glad to see no one cooked your foolish ass you turkey.
>
> >> >> ><PLONK>
>
> >> >> Always love the leftie loon. They make claims, provide cites that
> >> >> don't support the claims, call names, and then utilize the kill file.
>
> >> >understand.
>
>
> > Fox claimed those were legitimate Obama supporters, you must have
> >missed that.
>
> Did Fox provide a story, yes or no? Do you demand the same thing from
> all networks and newspapers?
>
> >Fox didn't prove their claim thus the story itself is
>
> >false.
>
> The claim here was that Fox News hired people to smear Obama. Since
> that is not what the story was, that is an independent claim. Can you
> support it or not?
>
> > Again Sherlock, the mere fact that it appeared on video or TV
> >doesn't make it real. Saddam Hussein use to have his security forces
> >dress up as civilians to produce propaganda of Saddam loving the
> >inhabitants in the countryside, and this video would appear on Iraqi
> >TV, that it was shown on TV didn't make them legitimate civilians.
>
> Again, do you demand the same level of evidence from all networks and
> papers or just from sources you don't agree with?
Yes, I demand the same proof from all networks. MSNBC was caught
lying about Sarah Palin's husband being a member of the Alaska
Independence party during the election. The only reason we are not
able to acquire hard evidence that Fox hired these fake so-called pro-
Soviet Obama supporters is that Fox themselves denied us essential
investigative information such as the names of the people. Can you
explain why Fox was unable to obtain and interview with those people?
They had cameras on the scene but not a reporter? They couldn't get
their names?
nobody
Surely you'll be able to cite posts where you've demanded such, right?
> MSNBC was caught
>lying about Sarah Palin's husband being a member of the Alaska
>Independence party during the election.
And you can cite posts where you called them on this at the time,
right? Any other examples of you demanding the same proof from all
networks?
>The only reason we are not
>able to acquire hard evidence that Fox hired these fake so-called pro-
>Soviet Obama supporters is that Fox themselves denied us essential
>investigative information such as the names of the people. Can you
>explain why Fox was unable to obtain and interview with those people?
>They had cameras on the scene but not a reporter? They couldn't get
>their names?
I couldn't say, however it's a HUGE leap (and irresponsible) to then
claim Fox must have hired these people.
nobody
Sorry, you've failed to show that Fox hired anyone to smear Obama,
case dismissed.
Jim Sumner
You've failed to show Fox didn't hire them to construct anti-
Democrat propaganda, the burden of proof is on the one making the
claim, Fox is claiming those were Obama supporters and they failed to
provide followup interviews to prove it thus we can conclude there is
no evidence that those were actual Obama supporters. You don't make
the rules on what constitutes a claim and simply because something
appears as a story (10 seconds of video is what you call an entire
story? Bizarre) or video.....
Case dismissed.
Jim Sumner
It is not a huge leap, Fox is a propaganda network for the GOP,
their sole purpose is anti-Democrat propaganda 24/7.
nobody
You're right, therefore those who claim that Fox *did* hire them
should be able to prove their claim. One shouldn't need to disprove a
claim unless another claim had been made first.
> Case dismissed.
Indeed...
nobody
<crickets.wav>
>>
>> > MSNBC was caught
>> >lying about Sarah Palin's husband being a member of the Alaska
>> >Independence party during the election.
>>
>> And you can cite posts where you called them on this at the time,
>> right? �Any other examples of you demanding the same proof from all
>> networks?
<crickets.wav>
>>
>> >The only reason we are not
>> >able to acquire hard evidence that Fox hired these fake so-called pro-
>> >Soviet Obama supporters is that Fox themselves denied us essential
>> >investigative information such as the names of the people. Can you
>> >explain why Fox was unable to obtain and interview with those people?
>> >They had cameras on the scene but not a reporter? They couldn't get
>> >their names?
>>
>> I couldn't say, however it's a HUGE leap (and irresponsible) to then
>> claim Fox must have hired these people.
>
>
> It is not a huge leap, Fox is a propaganda network for the GOP,
>their sole purpose is anti-Democrat propaganda 24/7.
Oh look, another unsupported / unproven claim -- whodda thunk it?
Jim Sumner
It is proven by everyone who doesn't watch Fox, only Fox fans claim
the network is fair and balanced.
Jim Sumner
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 03:42:50 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
We will prove our claim when Fox provides us with their names so
that we can investigate them. Unfortunately Fox refuses to do so
because Fox knows they weren't real Obama supporters. Since Fox will
not provide us with their names we must conclude that Fox failed to
prove that those were real Obama supporters thus the initial claim
that Obama supporters on election night waved a Soviet flag in
celebration of Obama's victory was never proven to begin with. The Fox
story on that was a LOSER and it didn't prove itself.
nobody
And your new claim remains unsupported -- just more foaming at the
mouth from you.
nobody
Have you contacted them and asked them? Please provide the email.
>Unfortunately Fox refuses to do so
>because Fox knows they weren't real Obama supporters. Since Fox will
>not provide us with their names we must conclude that Fox failed to
>prove that those were real Obama supporters thus the initial claim
>that Obama supporters on election night waved a Soviet flag in
>celebration of Obama's victory was never proven to begin with. The Fox
>story on that was a LOSER and it didn't prove itself.
Your "logic" explains many things about the thought process of the
leftie loon.
Jim Sumner
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:08:06 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
>
>
The Fox claim of "Fair and Balanced" in unsupported.
Jim Sumner
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:18:09 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
So does your "logic" that if something appears on TV it must be
true, TV certainly can't be used for propaganda thus Nazi TV during
the Third Reich was 100% reliable because you could watch it inside of
a screen.
nobody
I don't recall having said, but I'm not so partisan that I would
assume everything being said by networks and newspapers is
automatically a lie. It is reasonable to make the presumption that if
a story was untrue, documentable evidence would emerge that showed
that. There's been none provided in this case other than accusations.
Jim Sumner
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 04:58:13 -0800 (PST), Jim Sumner
>
As I've already explained a thousand times Fox did not give us the
names of those so-called pro-Soviet Obama supporters thusly how can
evidence emerge? Fox rigged it to prevent any further investigation.
If Fox had provided their names to the audience any media outlet could
have contacted them after the video was shown and found out more about
those people to prove if they were legitimate Democrats. After
interviews with them if it was shown that indeed they were pro-Soviet
Democrats and everyone in their personal life verified that they were
Democrats with such key details like, "Oh he vehemently hated George
Bush and Dick Cheney, everytime I was around him he would say
something about Bush being evil".......then Fox would have proven
beyond a shadow of a doubt that the video did indeed depict what they
claimed it did.