News Corp Phone Hacking Scandal is the New Watergate

[Too_Many_Tools]

More and more it looks like the News Corp phone hacking scandal is the
new Watergate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_hacking_scandal_comparisons_with_Watergate

While it is early for broad historical perspective, many commentators
have pointed out similarities between the "UK phone hacking scandal of
2011", involving illegal acquisition of confidential information by
news media companies, and the scandal over bugging the Democratic
National Committee headquarters in 1972, commonly referred to as the
"Watergate Scandal."

So when will the FCC pull Faux News licenses?

Not soon enough.

TMT

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 8, 11:11 pm, ogro...@webtv.net (Padraigh ProAmerica) wrote:
> Fox News doesn't have licenses, dumbass.
>
> Individual broadcast stations have licenses. Unless Murdoch's name is on
> the license, they can't be pulled for anything he did.
>
> Cable networks are not licensed.
>
> "Too Many Tools= a box of hammers, which you are even dumber than.
>
> --
> "A good march should make a man with a wooden leg want to step out."--
>
> John Phillip Sousa

LOL...looks like you are the dumbass.

The FBI is already investigating News Corp...criminal charges to
follow.

TMT

[Ed Huntress]

Fox Broadcasting Company, a subsidiary of News Corp., owns 27 TV
stations in the US. News Corp. is publicly traded but Murdoch owns
most of the voting shares. He also is Chairman and CEO.

So, in theory, the licenses could all be pulled on a "character"
decision against Murdoch. But the FCC very rarely has used that
provision of the Communications Act of 1934 to actually revoke a
license.

--
Ed Huntress

[Bret Cahill]

> >> Fox News doesn't have licenses, dumbass.
>
> >> Individual broadcast stations have licenses. Unless Murdoch's name is on
> >> the license, they can't be pulled for anything he did.
>
> >> Cable networks are not licensed.
>
> >> "Too Many Tools= a box of hammers, which you are even dumber than.
>
> >> --
> >> "A good march should make a man with a wooden leg want to step out."--
>
> >> John Phillip Sousa
>
> >LOL...looks like you are the dumbass.
>
> >The FBI is already investigating News Corp...criminal charges to
> >follow.
>
> >TMT
>
> Fox Broadcasting Company, a subsidiary of News Corp., owns 27 TV
> stations in the US. News Corp. is publicly traded but Murdoch owns
> most of the voting shares. He also is Chairman and CEO.
>
> So, in theory, the licenses could all be pulled on a "character"
> decision against Murdoch. But the FCC very rarely has used that
> provision of the Communications Act of 1934 to actually revoke a
> license.

A simple new law could solve all these problems:

Whenever a media mogul testifies that he "can't figger out how he made
billions by not knowing what was going on" his assets are immediately
seized and liquidated and used to pay off public debt.

It's 100% certain that he never did any honest work for his money.


Bret Cahill

[de...@dudu.org]

Oh dear, what will we ever do without Fox telling us their own version
of reality?

>
>Not soon enough.
>
>TMT

[JohnJohnsn]

On May 8, 11:08 pm, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> More and more it looks like the News Corp phone hacking scandal is the
> new Watergate
>

Actually, the one thing that the author of the below article
_conveniently_ missed is a connection to the current presidential
candidate and the scandal, as existed in the real "Watergate scandal."

Did you, and he, _conveniently_ forget that?

However, the _current_ presidential candidate _does_ have a direct
connection to a "Watergate-type" scandal; multiple, actually:

"Fast & Furious", "White Gun," "SolarGate" and "CronyGate:" the ones
we _do_ know about. Maybe even "NBPP in Philly-gate:" that was caused
by an Obama minion: Eric "The Red" Holder.

Yet all you Liberals want to ignore _that_ "Inconvenient Truth."

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_hacking_scandal_comparisons_with_W...
>
"This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it.
Please introduce links to this page from related articles; suggestions
may be available. (November 2011)"

I view this as a PsyOp trying to divert attention from _this_
"Inconvenient Truth":

GALLUP DAILY POLLS

May 5-7, 2012 – Updates daily at 1 p.m. ET; reflects one-day change

Obama Job Approval

Approval: 46% -1
Disapproval: 47% -

Presidential Election

Romney: 47% +1
Obama: 44% -1

7-day rolling average

"Fast & Furious", "White Gun," "SolarGate" and "CronyGate": Obama's
Watergate(s)

Barack Hussien Obama, Jr.:
-All the answers as a candidate;
-No solutions as the president!

"If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist you'll
have to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not stupid!"

Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) - a system of government where the
least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing,
and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or
succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the
confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
See: Obama Administration, 2009-2013

"Sunday, January 20th, 2013 - The End of an Error"

Obama "GONE" 1-20-2013
http://tinyurl.com/Obama-Gone-2013

[Fried Dog And Poke Weed]

In article <63bd135b-c023-4bcf-86b4-
1c3c4c...@e9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>

Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> More and more it looks like

You're an idiot.


http://thetrenches.us/2012/05/10000-to-anyone-who-provides-the-
college-transcripts-of-president-barack-obama/

You’ve failed, media.

You’ve had over three years to vet President Barack Obama. Yet
in three years in office and over a year of campaigning
beforehand, you have either been oddly uninterested or
purposefully ignorant of Barack Obama’s educational history. You
were, however, quite interested in George Bush’s transcripts.

This uncharacteristic absence of curiosity about an American
president alarms us. At $15 trillion, our nation’s debt is the
highest it has ever been – and it keeps growing. We’re not
convinced that Barack is as smart as you media elitists keep
insisting he is.

We therefore offer in reward $10,000 to anyone who provides the
college transcripts of President Barack Obama. Occidental,
Harvard, Columbia…any would represent more intellectual
curiosity about the leader of the free world than the media has
demonstrated since Obama won the Democrat primary.

Upon obtaining any of these transcripts, please contact
war[at]thetrenches[dot]us for verification and payment. This
offer goes into effect immediately.

Media, your stranglehold on the truth ends NOW. Let the vetting
begin.

Bellum Letale

Let’s “spread the wealth around” to vet the prez. If you’d like
to donate to this initiative (so we can increase the bounty) or
our upcoming initiatives, click the donate button.

https://www.wepay.com/donations/102129

[Flint]

When Obama pulls a Hitler, and declares himself 'Fuehrer'...

--
Flint

[Flint]

Sounds more like a wet dream...

--
Flint

[Jon Elson]

Too_Many_Tools wrote:


>
> So when will the FCC pull Faux News licenses?
>
> Not soon enough.

Well, the FCC doesn't have jurisdiction in the UK.
And, I haven't heard about much of this phone message
hacking in the US, so far.

Jon

[Too_Many_Tools]

> Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree Ed...and so the FCC does have a historical hook into Murdoch.

And this is a never say never case....Murdoch had to shut down the 168
year old paper he had (a very profitable paper) to try to save his
cable deal...which has not defused the situation. I expect when it
hits the American shores, it will be like sh*t hitting the fan.

Bribing foreign officials is illegal in the United States and we have
yet to see those charges bought.

What I am really interested in seeing is what the FBI
uncovers...within a large company it is common to do stuff in a common
way...do you really think that the American side of News Corp is any
different from the British counterpart when they are joined at the
head by Murdoch?

The other really damning point is that Murdoch is an on hands guy...he
was involved in the editorial content of the British press and you can
damn well bet that he has his fingers in it here in the United States.

One only needs to see the increase of Pro-Murdoch articles by right
wing hacks that are poured into the news stream now to see that News
Corp is very worried about what is coming their way in the United
States.

TMT

[Fried Dog And Poke Weed]

In article <92141e30-4202-4121-a97a-
25269d...@36g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> LOL...looks like I'm the dumbass.
>

Yep, looks that way.

[Lookout]

That was his OPONENTS job, not the media.

And they couldn't prove shit.

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

[pyotr filipivich]

Let the Record show that Flint <age...@section21.org> on or about Wed,
09 May 2012 14:01:46 -0400 did write, type or otherwise cause to
appear in talk.politics.guns the following:

Too Many Tools is really really, really reaching. Or does he
somehow believe that Rupert Murdoch is President of the United
Kingdom, wiretapping his political opponents?

Ignorance can be cured, but this is beyond ignorance.

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
Next Month's Panel: Suicide - getting it right the first time.

[Hawke]

And this is America where we have a legal system that never holds
corporations accountable for anything they do. We also don't prosecute
most politicians that commit crimes either. Super rich people are also
in a protected class. So the chances of Newscorp actually getting in
hot water over this scandal are very slim indeed.

Hawke

[Hawke]

I'm just wondering what is the point of wanting Obama's college
transcripts. We already know that he graduated from Harvard cum laude,
which means he graduated in the top ten percent of his class. As far as
I know, that means his grades were very good. What more does anyone need
to know than that? And what for?

Hawke

[Ed Huntress]

Before any of that would be raised as an issue, you have to look at
the FCC's responsibility to the public and how they implement their
responsibilities to ensure that broadcasters "serve the public
interest."

Given their charge, which includes promoting a diversity of opinion
and sources of broadcast information, FOX is pretty well shielded.
Without them there would not be nearly as much diversity of opinion on
the air. And regarding their cable operation, that's a free-for-all,
anyway, because there are few access limitations as there are with
broadcast spectrum.

From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses owned by
News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child molestation.

--
Ed Huntress

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 10, 10:07 am, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Let the Record show that Flint <age...@section21.org> on or about Wed,
> 09 May 2012 14:01:46 -0400 did write, type or otherwise cause to
> appear in talk.politics.guns the following:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 5/9/2012 12:08 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> >> More and more it looks like the News Corp phone hacking scandal is the
> >> new Watergate
>

> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_hacking_scandal_comparisons_with_W...

>
> >> While it is early for broad historical perspective, many commentators
> >> have pointed out similarities between the "UK phone hacking scandal of
> >> 2011", involving illegal acquisition of confidential information by
> >> news media companies, and the scandal over bugging the Democratic
> >> National Committee headquarters in 1972, commonly referred to as the
> >> "Watergate Scandal."
>
> >> So when will the FCC pull Faux News licenses?
>
> >> Not soon enough.
>
> >> TMT
>
> >When Obama pulls a Hitler, and declares himself 'Fuehrer'...
>
>         Too Many Tools is really really, really reaching.  Or does he
> somehow believe that Rupert Murdoch is President of the United
> Kingdom, wiretapping his political opponents?
>
>         Ignorance can be cured, but this is beyond ignorance.
>
> tschus
> pyotr
>
> --
> pyotr filipivich

> Next Month's Panel: Suicide - getting it right the first time.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Many Brits do believe exactly that.

And it is changing the political structure at the top there.

TMT

[Lookout]

This is the same type of idiot who is a birther, or, the latest
one..the ones who say the photo from the nite of the raid in
Abbottabad was doctored and Obama wasn't really in the room.

These are racist punks who see their white way of life dying and they
are simply acting like 4th grade punks. If you met one on the street
and challenged him he'd run like hell.

I've done just that...and each one ran.

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 10, 12:28 pm, Ed Huntress <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 10:19:56 -0700, Hawke

>
>
>
>
>
> <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
> >On 5/8/2012 10:04 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> >> On Tue, 8 May 2012 21:37:59 -0700 (PDT), Too_Many_Tools

> >> <too_many_to...@yahoo.com>  wrote:

> Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I understand your opinion but as I have said this is a "Never Say
Never" case.

No one ever expected the closure of the168 year old News of the World
newspaper either.

Or the arrests of dozens of News Corp employees.

Or Murdoch's BSkyB bid of $12 billion to be cancelled.

Or...well you get the trend...the list is long...

Murdoch is in damage control mode...and after the Brits get done with
him, the United States Government will start in and there is no reason
to doubt that News Corp is any cleaner here than in England.

TMT

TMT

[dca...@krl.org]

On May 10, 1:23 pm, Hawke <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:




> I'm just wondering what is the point of wanting Obama's college
> transcripts. We already know that he graduated from Harvard cum laude,
> which means he graduated in the top ten percent of his class. As far as
> I know, that means his grades were very good. What more does anyone need
> to know than that? And what for?
>
> Hawke

Close but no cigar. He graduated from Columbia and was law review at
Harvard Law School and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law
School. At least that is what Wiki has.

And Harvard Law School has the following:

. For students who matriculated as of, or after, Fall Term 2008, the
summa cum laude will be determined by the requirement of a 4.75 GPA.
The honor is exact and does not involve "rounding off"; ie., a GPA of
4.749 does not result in a degree summa cum laude. If, in a given
year, no student earns a GPA of 4.75 or higher, summa cum laude will
be awarded to the student (or students in the case of a tie) with the
highest overall GPA.

5. The magna cum laude will be awarded to the next ten percent of the
entire class.

6. The cum laude will be awarded to the next 30 percent of the entire
class.

Now that is what is current for Harvard Law School. When Obama
graduated things might have been different. But currently Magna Cum
Laude means one graduates in the ten percent of the class that is
below those that graduate Summa Cum Laude. So Obama could have not
been in the top 10 percent of class and still graduated Magna Cum
Laude if the rules were the same when he graduated as they are now.

But you are right. He got good grades and beyond that who cares.

Dan

[RD Sandman]

Ed Huntress <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in
news:0cunq7d2bk2c14r67...@4ax.com:

Besides, the FCC doesn't control cable news stations.....only over the
air ones. The real target of this is Fox News and the FCC has no
licensing power over it.

--

It's too bad the people who really know how to run this
country are so busy cutting hair and driving taxis!!

George Burns


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 10, 2:21 pm, RD Sandman <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Ed Huntress <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote innews:0cunq7d2bk2c14r67...@4ax.com:

>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 10 May 2012 10:19:56 -0700, Hawke
> > <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>
> >>On 5/8/2012 10:04 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 8 May 2012 21:37:59 -0700 (PDT), Too_Many_Tools

> >>> <too_many_to...@yahoo.com>  wrote:

> RD (The Sandman)- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

LOL...so you have proof that Faux News has not tapped phones like News
of the World did?

And that they have not bribed foreign officials?

If so then please present it.

Murdoch is sweating for a reason.

TMT

[dca...@krl.org]

So do you have proof that you have not murdered anyone? I bet you do
not. But if you do please present it.

Dan

[Too_Many_Tools]

>                                                     Dan- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Meanwhile you can provide the proof that Obama was not born an
American.

Laugh..laugh..laugh...

TMT

[dca...@krl.org]

On May 10, 10:30 pm, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:




> Meanwhile you can provide the proof that Obama was not born an
> American.
>
> Laugh..laugh..laugh...
>
> TMT

I am pretty sure I can find a copy of Obama's birth certificate
proving that he was born in the U.S.


Dan

[JohnJohnsn]

I'm sure you can; but can you find one that Obama's lawyers haven't
already testified under oath to being fake?

Obama Lawyer Admits Birth Certificate Is A Forgery

A lawyer representing U.S. President Barack Obama has admitted the
long-form birth certificate presented by the White House last year is
a forgery...

http://www.therightperspective.org/2012/04/15/obama-lawyer-admits-birth-certificate-is-a-forgery/

[Hawke]

My point exactly. Because of political considerations a company like
Newscorp is virtually above the law. At least it's above American law.
Other countries where they don't worship at the alter of the corporation
may be more ready to actually hold Newscorp accountable when it commits
criminal actions.

Hawke

[Hawke]

Well, that is right. Conservatives aren't known for their backbone. What
they are known for is their hypocrisy.


Hawke

[George Plimpton]

False. If they engaged in criminal conduct, they'd pay for it. The
fact you won't get their licenses revoked here based on something that
happened in the UK is just too bad for you.

[Too_Many_Tools]

> happened in the UK is just too bad for you.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Liar.

Yes they can.

And they will.

How's that BP doing?

FIgured out how we know that you lied yet?

TMT

[Hawke]

On 5/12/2012 2:06 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
=

>>> From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses owned by
>>> News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child molestation.
>>>
>>
>>
>> My point exactly. Because of political considerations a company like
>> Newscorp is virtually above the law.
>
> False. If they engaged in criminal conduct, they'd pay for it. The fact
> you won't get their licenses revoked here based on something that
> happened in the UK is just too bad for you.

We're not interested in what they did in the UK. We're concerned about
the regs or crimes Newscorp may have committed in this country. If they
find any watch and see how light the punishment is. That's how it works
here. Corporations rule. That's probably news to you.

Hawke

[Too_Many_Tools]

Maybe not Hawke...Murdoch is getting a new one ripped over in the UK.

No one thought it would happen.

And history alwasy repeats itself.

TMT

[George Plimpton]

On 5/12/2012 10:10 PM, Hawke wrote:
> On 5/12/2012 2:06 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
> =
>>>> From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses owned by
>>>> News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child molestation.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My point exactly. Because of political considerations a company like
>>> Newscorp is virtually above the law.
>>
>> False. If they engaged in criminal conduct, they'd pay for it. The fact
>> you won't get their licenses revoked here based on something that
>> happened in the UK is just too bad for you.
>
>
> We're not interested in what they did in the UK. We're concerned about
> the regs or crimes Newscorp may have committed in this country.

You have no evidence they did.

[Tom Gardner]

Like 1960's and 70's official documents written in MS Word?

[Tom Gardner]

https://www.iardc.org ( IARDC stands for Illinois Attorney Registration
And Disciplinary Committee. It's the official arm of lawyer discipline
in Illinois.

Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and [current] U.S. President Makes Up
Constitutional Quotes during State of The Union (SOTU) Address. Big
surprise.

Consider these:

1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review , is
no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order
to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary
Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is not
really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew your
license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when you've
been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender" your license
five seconds before the state suspends you.
2. Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993,
after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her
license or standing trial for Insurance fraud!
3. So, we have the first black President and First Lady [trained
lawyers, but] who don't actually have licenses to practice law - Facts.
Source:http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license/
4. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University
of Chicago . A senior lecturer is one thing; a fully ranked law
professor is another.
5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March 2008 saying
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school -
but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never
held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008. "He did not hold the
title of Professor of Law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant
Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago
School of Law . Source:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html
6. The former Constitutional Senior Lecturer (Obama) cited the U.S.
Constitution the other night during his State of the Union Address .
Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of
Independence ... not the Constitution (the B-Cast posted the video:
http://www.breitbart.tv/did-obama-confuse-the-constitution-with-the-declaration-of-independence/).
7. Free Republic : In the State of the Union Address, President Obama
said: "We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise
enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal.
Um, wrong citing, wrong founding document there Champ, I mean Mr.
President. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named
them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence
and it reads: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit
of Happiness.
8. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later
in the same speech?

[max headroom]

Hawke <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in news:jogthk$rle$2...@speranza.aioe.org:

> transcripts. We already know that he graduated from Harvard cum laude,...

How do you know that? Have you seen any proof? Has anyone?

> ... which means he graduated in the top ten percent of his class. As far as

> I know, that means his grades were very good. What more does anyone need
> to know than that? And what for?

"Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa..."

[Ramon F. Herrera]

Offering money to commit a crime is a criminal act.

The transcripts have been sealed by Harvard, Columbia and other
institutions.

-Ramon

[M.I. Wakefield]

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
news:BsqdnVqaackwTzLS...@giganews.com...

> https://www.iardc.org ( IARDC stands for Illinois Attorney Registration
> And Disciplinary Committee. It's the official arm of lawyer discipline in
> Illinois.
>
> Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and [current] U.S. President Makes Up
> Constitutional Quotes during State of The Union (SOTU) Address. Big
> surprise.
>
> Consider these:

Or we could consider this:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp

... and come to the conclusion that you are an idiot, or a troll, or both.

[Gray Guest]

"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in news:6VQrr.154111$275.67619
@unlimited.newshosting.com:

Sophistry and bullshit.

Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
MSNBC.

--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.

What I like about this attitude is it works equally well for Iran and the
Democrat National Covention.

http://nukeitfromorbit.com/

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,

Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>MSNBC.

People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.

All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
that it is, so they're liars".

So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.

--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[M.I. Wakefield]

"Gray Guest" wrote in message
news:XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100...

> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in news:6VQrr.154111$275.67619
> @unlimited.newshosting.com:
>
> > "Tom Gardner" wrote in message
> > news:BsqdnVqaackwTzLS...@giganews.com...
> >
> >> https://www.iardc.org ( IARDC stands for Illinois Attorney Registration
> >> And Disciplinary Committee. It's the official arm of lawyer discipline
> >> in
> >> Illinois.
> >>
> >> Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and [current] U.S. President Makes
> >> Up
> >> Constitutional Quotes during State of The Union (SOTU) Address. Big
> >> surprise.
> >>
> >> Consider these:
> >
> > Or we could consider this:
> >
> > http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp
> >
> > ... and come to the conclusion that you are an idiot, or a troll, or
> > both.
>
> Sophistry and bullshit.
>
> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda.

"The truth" is now an agenda?

[Gray Guest]

"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in news:PjRrr.36756$Yn4.26988
@unlimited.newshosting.com:

No, lies are. And Dems and liberals are nothing but lies. All day every
day.

[Gray Guest]

fa...@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote in news:jooncq$g2v$2@blue-
new.rahul.net:

> In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
> Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>MSNBC.
>
> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
> that it is, so they're liars".
>
> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>

Thye claim to be neutral. First and biggest.

Besides I'm holding back until President Knappy hair releases his school
records.

[Hawke]

Did I say I did?

Hawke

[Hawke]

How about your boy Romney? He ever tell any? You're a joke. The guy you
would like to see president is the biggest liar I've ever seen. But I'm
sure you have no idea that anything he's ever said is not true.

Hawke

[Gunner Asch]

And printed on a lazer printer.....

[Dick]

In article <jooqdg$s3u$2...@speranza.aioe.org>

You inferred it.

[Gunner Asch]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
Falk) wrote:

>In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>MSNBC.
>
>People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
>All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>that it is, so they're liars".
>
>So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.

Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits

Now was there anything else you wished to look stupid about?

Gunner

--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".

[Gunner Asch]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 12:29:35 -0400, "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present>
wrote:

"The Truth" is now something Snopes is concerned with?

[Ed Huntress]

First, the word you want is "implied," not "inferred." Second, you're
wrong.

The FCC, under the Communications Act of 1934, can deny or revoke
licenses for "character" of the owner or officer(s), which is not
necessarily a matter of domestic criminality -- or even of any
criminal conviction at all. If Murdoch was convicted of a felony in
the UK, the FCC certainly could revoke News Corp's licenses. And he's
CEO and Chairman of the US company that, through another tier of
ownership, is the licensee for those broadcast licenses.

The key point, however, is that they're very unlikely to do so, for
reasons that have been discussed here at length.

--
Ed Huntress

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
>Falk) wrote:
>
>>In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>>Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>>MSNBC.
>>
>>People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>>
>>All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>>my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>>that it is, so they're liars".
>>
>>So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>
>Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits

With THAT many hits, you should be able to come up with just one
"lie."

Let's see it.

[Jeff M]

On 5/13/2012 11:04 AM, Gray Guest wrote:
> "M.I. Wakefield"<none@present> wrote in news:6VQrr.154111$275.67619
> @unlimited.newshosting.com:
>
>> "Tom Gardner" wrote in message
>> news:BsqdnVqaackwTzLS...@giganews.com...
>>
>>> https://www.iardc.org ( IARDC stands for Illinois Attorney Registration
>>> And Disciplinary Committee. It's the official arm of lawyer discipline
> in
>>> Illinois.
>>>
>>> Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and [current] U.S. President Makes Up
>>> Constitutional Quotes during State of The Union (SOTU) Address. Big
>>> surprise.
>>>
>>> Consider these:
>>
>> Or we could consider this:
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp
>>
>> ... and come to the conclusion that you are an idiot, or a troll, or
> both.
>>
> Sophistry and bullshit.

constitute the sum total of who you are and all you know.

[Jeff M]

On 5/13/2012 11:27 AM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
> Gray Guest<No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>> MSNBC.
>
> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
> that it is, so they're liars".
>
> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.

Their agenda is simply to ferret out the truth and counter the lies.
This is, however, very galling to those who's agenda is the opposite.

[Jeff M]

No. But creating and spreading lies is, and for those people the truth
is their enemy.

[George Plimpton]

You believe they did. You believe it despite having no evidence for it.

[George Plimpton]

On 5/13/2012 11:19 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> On 13 May 2012 18:07:42 -0000, "Dick"<di...@somail.com> wrote:
>
>> In article<jooqdg$s3u$2...@speranza.aioe.org>
>> Hawke<davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/13/2012 8:04 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/2012 10:10 PM, Hawke wrote:
>>>>> On 5/12/2012 2:06 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses owned by
>>>>>>>> News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child molestation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My point exactly. Because of political considerations a company like
>>>>>>> Newscorp is virtually above the law.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> False. If they engaged in criminal conduct, they'd pay for it. The fact
>>>>>> you won't get their licenses revoked here based on something that
>>>>>> happened in the UK is just too bad for you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We're not interested in what they did in the UK. We're concerned about
>>>>> the regs or crimes Newscorp may have committed in this country.
>>>>
>>>> You have no evidence they did.
>>>
>>>
>>> Did I say I did?
>>>
>>> Hawke
>>
>> You inferred it.
>
> First, the word you want is "implied," not "inferred."

Hawwwwke-Ptooey did both.

[Jeff M]

I Googled "Gunner lies" and got "About 3,650,000 results (0.25 seconds)"
I suppose that means he's about six times the liar Snopes is.

[George Plimpton]

Fawning leftists during the 2008 campaign and since have shit themselves
over Obama supposedly having been a "Constitutional Law" [sic] professor
at Chicago, and take this to be a measure of his brilliance. First of
all, he wasn't a professor, he was a lecturer. He was not a scholar.
Professors do original research in their fields; Obama did not. Anyone
who has graduated law school apparently can lecture in law - Obama is
the proof. He never did post graduate study in the law, never did any
original research. Obama teaching in law school is akin to someone who
just graduated with a BS in chemistry teaching first year college chemistry.

Second, the fawning leftists keep gushing incoherently over the fact it
was "Constitutional Law" [sic], as if that's the only intellectually
worthy dimension to law school. Typically for leftists, they imagine
torts, civil procedure, contracts, intellectual property, and all the
other areas of study in law school are just grubby trash. That's a
silly and almost juvenile belief - but as I said, it's typical for leftists.

[George Plimpton]

"1965 - Vietnamese machine gunner lies dead in foxhole after Viet Cong
overran his position at Michelin Rubber Plantation."

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13476480@N07/6098960634/

[Lookout]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
Falk) wrote:

>In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>MSNBC.
>
>People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
>All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>that it is, so they're liars".
>
>So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>

They don't take sides. They simply post what facts they can and reach
a logical conclusion.

But..if you think the whole world is against you as conservatives do
then you understand the whining.

[Donn Messenheimer]

On 5/13/2012 9:27 AM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
> Gray Guest<No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>> MSNBC.
>
> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
> that it is, so they're liars".
>
> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.

I don't think Snopes lies. What they do is shade things.

There is an unmistakable left-wing tilt to the site and to the
Mikkelsons. Barbara Mikkelson, who does most of the writing for the
Snopes site, used to be a regular poster on a number of Usenet groups,
including alt.support.childfree, where her comments gave not terribly
subtle clues to her liberal orientation.

[Gunner Asch]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp

http://twg2a.wordpress.com/tag/snopes-lies/

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/bill-oreilly-lies-and-misinformation-snopes-lies-and-misinformation-carol-bengle-gilbert-obama-supporter-or-paid-orwellian-editor/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2307857/posts

http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/911-facts/48-911-commentary/5365-snopescom-lies-continues-the-911-cover-up.html

Just a random sampling, I didnt read any of them.

Your next magic claim will be?

[Gray Guest]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:35uvq7h320vc322ql...@4ax.com:

> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
> Falk) wrote:
>
>>In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>>Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>>MSNBC.
>>
>>People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>>
>>All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>>my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>>that it is, so they're liars".
>>
>>So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>
> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>
> Now was there anything else you wished to look stupid about?
>
> Gunner

That's all? I got 1,200,000 from Yahoo.

>
> --
> "The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
> capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
> It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
> Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
> and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
> such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
> fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
> fools that made him their prince".
>

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 13, 1:51 pm, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
> On 5/13/2012 1:26 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> >> Gunner Asch<gunnera...@gmail.com>  wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>
> >> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), f...@rahul.net (Edward A.
> >> Falk) wrote:
>
> >>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3Wereofftoseethewi...@88.198.244.100>,
> >>> Gray Guest<No_email_for_...@wahoo.com>  wrote:

>
> >>>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
> >>>> MSNBC.
>
> >>> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
> >>> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
> >>> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
> >>> that it is, so they're liars".
>
> >>> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>
> >> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>
> > With THAT many hits, you should be able to come up with just one
> > "lie."
>
> > Let's see it.
>
> I Googled "Gunner lies" and got "About 3,650,000 results (0.25 seconds)"

>   I suppose that means he's about six times the liar Snopes is.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

LOL...good boy Jeff.

I wondering who would come up with that angle.

As Gummer would say...

<VBG>

TMT

[Jeff M]

Can you show any actual EVIDENCE from a credible source for ANY of these
claims, i.e., for their supposed "left wing tilt," or "liberal
orientation" or how they "shade things"?

Moreover, even if there is some suggestion that Barbara Mikkelson once
had what others label a "liberal orientation" in her PERSONAL opinions
or politics, which they allegedly gleaned from her past comments in
presumably not primarily political Usenet groups like
"alt.support.childfree," that does not even raise a slight inference
that she must have gone on later to "shade things" with a supposedly
"left-wing tilt" in her work on Snopes. Far from it.

It appears to me that Snopes is simply in the business of examining
online myths, smears and lies, and then ferreting out and publishing the
truth of the matter, usually with their verifiable source material
included. Therefore, the more myths you spread, the more smears you
engage in, and the more lies you tell, or worse, the more myths, smears
and lies you want to believe, the more you are going to dislike or even
hate Snopes. It's as simple as that.

People who are more committed to facts, truth, openness and honesty than
they are driven by partisan ideology, political dogma or personal animus
seldom seem to have a problem with fact-checking sites like Snopes or
Politifact. Why do you suppose that is?

[Jeff M]

On 5/13/2012 3:24 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> Gunner Asch<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:35uvq7h320vc322ql...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
>> Falk) wrote:
>>
>>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>>> Gray Guest<No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>>> MSNBC.
>>>
>>> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>>>
>>> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>>> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>>> that it is, so they're liars".
>>>
>>> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>>
>> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>>
>> Now was there anything else you wished to look stupid about?
>>
>> Gunner
>
> That's all? I got 1,200,000 from Yahoo.

I got "About 9,370,000 results (0.27 seconds)" for "Grey Guest lies"
from Google.

[Benny Fishhole]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 13:51:12 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
wrote:

I Googled "Jeff M lies" and got "About 17,800,000 results (0.20
seconds)" I suppose that means you are about 5 times the liar Gunner
is, and about 30 times the liar Snopes is, LOL :)

[Benny Fishhole]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:46:59 -0400, Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net>
wrote:

>On Sun, 13 May 2012 11:09:15 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:

>
>>On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
>>Falk) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>>>Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>>>MSNBC.
>>>
>>>People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>>>
>>>All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>>>my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>>>that it is, so they're liars".
>>>
>>>So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>>
>>Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>

>Google "gunner lies" and we have some 3,650,000 hits.
>
>>

Google "douche bag lies" and we have About 6,540,000 results (0.24
seconds)

[Jeff M]

No, it's much higher than that; I can lie at least a thousand times
better than Gunner can. Google itself lies, of course. It's all part
of their notorious right wing bias.

[Benny Fishhole]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 15:29:34 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
wrote:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp

[JohnJohnsn]

On May 13, 1:06 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 13 May 2012 11:20:09 -0400, Tom Gardner <mars@tacks> wrote:

>
>> On 5/13/2012 11:04 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>>> On 5/12/2012 10:10 PM, Hawke wrote:
>
>>>> On 5/12/2012 2:06 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses owned
>>>>>>> by News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child molestation.
>
>>>>>> My point exactly. Because of political considerations a company like
>>>>>> Newscorp is virtually above the law.
>
>>>>> False. If they engaged in criminal conduct, they'd pay for it. The fact
>>>>> you won't get their licenses revoked here based on something that
>>>>> happened in the UK is just too bad for you.
>
>>>> We're not interested in what they did in the UK. We're concerned about
>>>> the regs or crimes Newscorp may have committed in this country.
>
>>> You have no evidence they did.
>

>> Like 1960's and 70's official documents written in MS Word?
>
> And printed on a lazer printer.....
>
Basically; I have no problem with that, as that is the modern way of
publishing public (or private, in the case of birth and death
certificates and school transcripts) records which have been stored
electronically for ease of storage and retrieval.

What I _do_ have a _big_ problem with is Obama's minions who thought
it necessary to fake both the originally-released "Certification Of
Live Birth," then the later-released "Certificate Of Live Birth:" both
now having admitted to being fakes by Obama attorney Alexandra Hill,
under oath, in a New Jersey court of law.

There was no reason whatsoever to believe that _IF_ Obama _really_
wanted to release a "true and correct, photostatic copy" (the old
"white on black" version), all he had to do was ask then-Governor
Linda Lingle; or current Hawai'i Governor Neil Abercrombie to issue an
Executive Order to then-Director of the Hawai'i State Department of
Health (HSDOH) Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino; or current-HSDOH Director
Loretta Fuddy; to expend all efforts to search the paper archives,
retrieve Obama's _original_ birth certificate, photostatic copy it (or
at the least, photocopy it if the old photostatic process is no longer
available), certify it and forward copies directly from the HSDOH to
the White House and the press corps "elite" that either wouldn't have
done it for Obama.

I believe that this whole thing was an intentional diversion by
Obama's minions to stur up controversy so that the focus would shift
away from Obama's agenda to "socialize" America in _his_ own image of
what America "should" be:

Change.org Releases Obama's Ideas for Change in America
Tim King Salem-News.com
Jan-17-2009 12:24

The notion of marijuana legalization making the top ten list for
Obama's transistion team has generated amazing Web traffic for Salem-
News.com, indicating that the subject is a very serious one among
today's Americans.

Salem-News.com

(WASHINGTON D.C.) - With just four days until the Inauguration,
Americans are poised to see how and what the most unique president in
U.S. history will do once he takes office.

Obama's Transistion Team says the country is alight with excitement,
not just about the arrival of Barack Obama in the White House but also
for the beginning of a new era of civic engagement.

"We've tapped into this energy with our Ideas for Change in America,
and today we held a press event at the National Press Club in
Washington DC to announce the winners of the competition", the team
reported.

They say the 10 winning ideas reflect the diverse interests of the
millions of people who are calling for change across the country.
Ideas include securing universal heath care, LGBT rights, and
sustainable green energy. All winning ideas can be viewed at
change.org/ideas.

Macon Phillips accepted the winning ideas on behalf of the
Presidential Transition Team, Phillips is the Director of New Media
and the person who oversees our second-favorite website, Change.gov.

Macon then addressed those who attended the event. Among those present
were nonprofit leaders and grassroots activists, and spoke about the
importance the administration will place on citizen-driven efforts
like Ideas for Change.

"With almost 8,000 ideas, more than 600,000 votes, and more than
175,000 participants, the Ideas for Change initiative has shown the
widespread interest across the country in renewed civic participation
and direct engagement in policymaking. And this is just the
beginning," the team said in a news release.

Starting next week, each winning idea will be teamed with a sponsoring
nonprofit, which will begin a national campaign to translate each into
actual policy.

Here are the top ten:

•Pass the DREAM Act - Support Higher Education for All Students
•Appoint Secretary of Peace in Department of Peace and Non-Violence
•Free Single Payer Health Care
•Develop & Implement a National Strategy for Sustainability
•Pass Marriage Equality Rights for LGBT Couples Nationwide
•Make the grid green in 10 years
•Legalize the Medicinal and Recreational Use of Marijuana
•Get FISA Right, repeal the PATRIOT Act, and restore our civil
liberties
•Save Small Business From the CPSIA¹
•Health Freedom IS Our First Freedom

The notion of marijuana legalization making the top ten list for
Obama's transistion team has generated amazing Web traffic for Salem-
News.com, indicating that the subject is a very serious one among
today's Americans.

Our reports are here:

•Marijuana Legalization: Retired Seattle Police Chief Says Obama
Should
Listen to Voters - Guest Opinion by Norm Stamper for Salem-News.com
http://salem-news.com/articles/december302008/leap_opinion_12-30-08.php

•Marijuana Legalization Tops List of Questions for Obama in Online
Poll - Tim King Salem-News.com
http://salem-news.com/articles/december122008/barack_cannabis_12-12-08.php

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim King is a former U.S. Marine with twenty years of experience on
the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist,
reporter and assignment editor. In addition to his role as a war
correspondent, this Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com's
Executive News Editor.

Tim spent the winter of 2006/07 in Afghanistan with Oregon troops. Tim
recently returned from Iraq where he covered the war there while
embedded with an Oregon Guard aviation unit. Serving the community in
very real terms, Salem-News.com is the nation's only truly independent
high traffic news Website, affiliated with Google News and several
other major search engines and news aggregators.

You can send Tim an email at this address: news...@salem-news.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/january172009/obsma_dreams_1-17-09.php

Fact: Barack Hussein Obama II was born on Oahu Island, in the city of
Honolulu, Honolulu County, Hawai'i on August 1, 1961, to African
father Barack Hussein Obama and Caucasian mother Stanley Ann Dunham.

Fact: Obama is _still_ using the birth certificate controversy as a
diversion.

Q.E.D.

Barack Hussien Obama, Jr.:
-All the answers as a candidate;
-No solutions as the president!

"If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist you'll
have to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not stupid!"

"Sunday, January 20th, 2013 - The End of an Error"

Obama "GONE" 1-20-2013
http://tinyurl.com/Obama-Gone-2013

Obama Countdown Clock
http://tinyurl.com/Obama-is-GONE

¹The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) of 2008

[Jeff M]

Yep. Mainly, it clearly shows how some of Obama's critics will lie or
twist and distort facts to suit their partisan political agenda, and
just how laughably crazy and absurd some of those lies are, not that any
lie is too crazy for some fools to believe.

[Jeff M]

On 5/13/2012 4:05 PM, Deucalion wrote:

> Just imagine what you would have gotten if you had used his old nym of
> "Grey Guest" and added the totals together. That was his old nym
> before he changed it to get around filters and caused everyone who had
> him filtered to do it again.

Yep. But claiming that search engine hit counts prove anything is
classic rightard stupidity. They just have no concept of what probative
evidence is.

[Dick]

In article <kduvq757n53o4a8q8...@4ax.com>

Ed Huntress <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> On 13 May 2012 18:07:42 -0000, "Dick" <di...@somail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <jooqdg$s3u$2...@speranza.aioe.org>
> >Hawke <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
> >>

> >> On 5/13/2012 8:04 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
> >> > On 5/12/2012 10:10 PM, Hawke wrote:
> >> >> On 5/12/2012 2:06 PM, George Plimpton wrote:

> >> >> =

> >> >>>>> From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses owned by
> >> >>>>> News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child molestation.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> My point exactly. Because of political considerations a company like
> >> >>>> Newscorp is virtually above the law.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> False. If they engaged in criminal conduct, they'd pay for it. The fact
> >> >>> you won't get their licenses revoked here based on something that
> >> >>> happened in the UK is just too bad for you.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> We're not interested in what they did in the UK. We're concerned about
> >> >> the regs or crimes Newscorp may have committed in this country.
> >> >
> >> > You have no evidence they did.
> >>
> >>

> >> Did I say I did?
> >>
> >> Hawke
> >
> >You inferred it.
>

> First, the word you want is "implied," not "inferred." Second, you're
> wrong.

Semantics. You're implying that the OP is a liar. I gave him
the benefit of the doubt that what he said was factual.

> The FCC, under the Communications Act of 1934, can deny or revoke
> licenses for "character" of the owner or officer(s), which is not
> necessarily a matter of domestic criminality -- or even of any
> criminal conviction at all. If Murdoch was convicted of a felony in
> the UK, the FCC certainly could revoke News Corp's licenses. And he's
> CEO and Chairman of the US company that, through another tier of
> ownership, is the licensee for those broadcast licenses.
>
> The key point, however, is that they're very unlikely to do so, for
> reasons that have been discussed here at length.
>
> --
> Ed Huntress

[Chuck Barnes]

In article <lk60r7tshvi3taqdb...@4ax.com>

Google smackdown.

SPNAK!

[Ed Huntress]

Uh, yeah. Semantics concerns the meaning of words. You don't know what
he "inferred," unless you're a mind reader.

> You're implying that the OP is a liar. I gave him
>the benefit of the doubt that what he said was factual.

?? That's bizarre. Hawke said that News Corp. would get off because of
its wealth and power. That's an opinion. Was he the OP? If so, he
wasn't talking about the FCC regulation that would allow them to judge
"character" on unspecified grounds. It's been charged several times
against people who were associated with the Communist Party. No
criminality was involved.

--
Ed Huntress

[JohnJohnsn]

On May 13, 3:29 pm, Jeff M <jmla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 5/13/2012 2:21 PM, Donn Messenheimer wrote:
>
>> On 5/13/2012 9:27 AM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>

>>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3Wereofftoseethewi...@88.198.244.100>,

Here's what Snopes has to say about Snopes:

About snopes.com

The snopes.com website was founded by Barbara and David Mikkelson, a
husband and wife team who live and work in the Los Angeles area. What
they began in 1995 as an expression of their shared interest in
researching urban legends has since grown into what is widely regarded
by folklorists, journalists, and laypersons alike as one of the World
Wide Web's essential resources. Snopes.com is routinely included in
annual "Best of the Web" lists and has been the recipient of two Webby
awards. The Mikkelsons have made multiple appearances as guests on
national news programs such as 20/20, ABC World News, CNN Sunday
Morning, and NPR's All Things Considered, and they and their work have
been profiled in numerous major news publications, including The New
York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Wall
Street Journal, and an April 2009 Reader's Digest feature ("The Rumor
Detectives") published as part of that magazine's "Your America:
Inspiring People and Stories" series.

With over 15 years' experience as professional researchers and
writers, the Mikkelsons have created in snopes.com what has come to be
regarded as an online touchstone of rumor research. Their work has
been described as painstaking, scholarly, and reliable, and has been
lauded by the world's top folklorists, including Jan Harold Brunvand,
Gary Alan Fine, and Patricia Turner. The couple has been approached by
many publishers and publisher's agents about doing a series of books,
but they remain uncommitted at this time, preferring instead to
continue focusing their efforts on their web site. Nevertheless,
hundreds of the Mikkelsons' articles have been cited by authors in a
variety of disciplines (an October 2011 search of Google Books for
such citations netted 6,230 results for Barbara Mikkelson alone), and
various of their articles have been published in textbooks currently
in use in the U.S. and Canadian school systems.

Because snopes.com is all about rumors, it was only a matter of time
before rumors began to circulate about it and its operators, such as
the following:

Snopes receives funding from an undisclosed source.
The source is undisclosed because Snopes refuses to
disclose that source. The Democratic Alliance, a funding
channel for uber-Leftist (Marxist) Billionaires (George Soros
etc.), direct funds to an "Internet Propaganda Arm" pushing
these views. The Democratic Alliance has been reported to
instruct Fundees to not disclose their funding source.

The snopes.com web site is (and always has been) a completely
independent, self-sufficient entity wholly owned by its operators,
Barbara and David Mikkelson, and funded through advertising revenues.
Neither the site nor its operators has ever received monies from (or
been engaged in any business or editorial relationship with), any
sponsor, investor, partner, political party, religious group, business
organization, government agency, or any other outside group or
organization.

Barbara Mikkelson is a Canadian citizen and as such cannot vote in
U.S. elections, register an affiliation with a U.S. political party,
or donate to any U.S. political campaign or candidate. David Mikkelson
is an American citizen whose participation in U.S. politics has never
extended beyond periodically exercising his civic duty at the ballot
box. As FactCheck confirmed in April 2009, David is a registered
independent who has never donated to, or worked on behalf of, any
political campaign or party. The Mikkelsons are wholly apolitical,
vastly preferring their quiet scholarly lives in the company of their
five cats to any political considerations.

http://www.snopes.com/info/aboutus.asp

[Gray Guest]

Benny Fishhole <be...@fakeaddress.edu> wrote in
news:lk60r7tshvi3taqdb...@4ax.com:

Hell I got 223,000,000 for "Jeff M is a jerkoff"

[Ed Huntress]

Oh, now there's a wise use of your time. Goat, are you trying to
demonstrate that you never left adolescence? You're going a good job.

Snopes is now part of the right-wing hate narrative because most of
the b.s. propogated on the Web is right-wing b.s., so they have so
many more targets. They probably find the right to be particularly
obnoxious, as I do -- childish, churlish, and foul-mouthed.

We discussed a while back how almost all of the "letters from an
officer in Afghanistan," and the faux quotes from the founders, and
the rest of the e-mail and Web-legend b.s. was coming from the right.
That's why Snopes, and Politifact, and FactCheck.org have been beating
the crap out of the right for years now. It's not that they ignore the
crap from the left; it's just that so much more of it comes from the
right. We used to see it here all the time.

The reaction from the right has been to accuse Snopes et al. of lying,
which is just another case of the right accusing the other side of
their own most egregious behavior -- another one of your tricks,
picked up from Karl Rove. Snopes has missed the mark a few times but
they hit the target so many more.

Now you're descending into the lowest form of pre-adolescent
mud-slinging, and you look like an ass.

--
Ed Huntress

[Gunner Asch]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 20:24:54 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
<No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:35uvq7h320vc322ql...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
>> Falk) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <XnsA0527ADCE7BA3We...@88.198.244.100>,
>>>Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>>>MSNBC.
>>>
>>>People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>>>
>>>All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>>>my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>>>that it is, so they're liars".
>>>
>>>So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>>
>> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>>
>> Now was there anything else you wished to look stupid about?
>>
>> Gunner
>
>That's all? I got 1,200,000 from Yahoo.

I was in a hurry..I had to go somewhere. Shrug

Gunner

[Gunner Asch]

<VBG> ^5!!!

[Jeff M]

Well said!

> Now you're descending into the lowest form of pre-adolescent
> mud-slinging, and you look like an ass.

Slight correction: He doesn't LOOK like an ass, he IS an ass.

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 13, 3:31 pm, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
> On 5/13/2012 3:24 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > Gunner Asch<gunnera...@gmail.com>  wrote in
> >news:35uvq7h320vc322ql...@4ax.com:

>
> >> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), f...@rahul.net (Edward A.
> >> Falk) wrote:
>
> >>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3Wereofftoseethewi...@88.198.244.100>,

> >>> Gray Guest<No_email_for_...@wahoo.com>  wrote:

>
> >>>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
> >>>> MSNBC.
>
> >>> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
> >>> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
> >>> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
> >>> that it is, so they're liars".
>
> >>> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>
> >> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>
> >> Now was there anything else you wished to look stupid about?
>
> >> Gunner
>
> > That's all? I got 1,200,000 from Yahoo.
>
> I got "About 9,370,000 results (0.27 seconds)" for "Grey Guest lies"

> from Google.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Only?

I guess that Google is having an off day.

TMT

[Too_Many_Tools]

>  Listen to Voters - Guest Opinion by Norm Stamper for Salem-News.comhttp://salem-news.com/articles/december302008/leap_opinion_12-30-08.php

>
> •Marijuana Legalization Tops List of Questions for Obama in Online

> Poll - Tim King Salem-News.comhttp://salem-news.com/articles/december122008/barack_cannabis_12-12-0...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----

> Tim King is a former U.S. Marine with twenty years of experience on
> the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist,
> reporter and assignment editor. In addition to his role as a war
> correspondent, this Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com's
> Executive News Editor.
>
> Tim spent the winter of 2006/07 in Afghanistan with Oregon troops. Tim
> recently returned from Iraq where he covered the war there while
> embedded with an Oregon Guard aviation unit. Serving the community in
> very real terms, Salem-News.com is the nation's only truly independent
> high traffic news Website, affiliated with Google News and several
> other major search engines and news aggregators.
>

> You can send Tim an email at this address: newsr...@salem-news.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----http://www.salem-news.com/articles/january172009/obsma_dreams_1-17-09...

>
> Fact: Barack Hussein Obama II was born on Oahu Island, in the city of
> Honolulu, Honolulu County, Hawai'i on August 1, 1961, to African
> father Barack Hussein Obama and Caucasian mother Stanley Ann Dunham.
>
> Fact: Obama is _still_ using the birth certificate controversy as a
> diversion.
>
> Q.E.D.
>
> Barack Hussien Obama, Jr.:
> -All the answers as a candidate;
> -No solutions as the president!
>
> "If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist you'll
> have to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you're not stupid!"
>
> "Sunday, January 20th, 2013 - The End of an Error"
>
> Obama "GONE" 1-20-2013http://tinyurl.com/Obama-Gone-2013
>

> Obama Countdown Clockhttp://tinyurl.com/Obama-is-GONE
>
> ¹The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) of 2008- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

You really aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

How is the studying going for that psych test..gotten past the first
question yet?

TMT

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 13, 3:45 pm, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
> On 5/13/2012 3:37 PM, Benny Fishhole wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 13 May 2012 13:51:12 -0500, Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On 5/13/2012 1:26 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:

> >>>> Gunner Asch<gunnera...@gmail.com>   wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>
> >>>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), f...@rahul.net (Edward A.
> >>>> Falk) wrote:
>
> >>>>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3Wereofftoseethewi...@88.198.244.100>,

> >>>>> Gray Guest<No_email_for_...@wahoo.com>   wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
> >>>>>> MSNBC.
>
> >>>>> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>
> >>>>> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
> >>>>> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
> >>>>> that it is, so they're liars".
>
> >>>>> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>
> >>>> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>
> >>> With THAT many hits, you should be able to come up with just one
> >>> "lie."
>
> >>> Let's see it.
>
> >> I Googled "Gunner lies" and got "About 3,650,000 results (0.25 seconds)"
> >>   I suppose that means he's about six times the liar Snopes is.
>
> > I Googled "Jeff M lies" and got "About 17,800,000 results (0.20
> > seconds)" I suppose that means you are about 5 times the liar Gunner
> > is, and about 30 times the liar Snopes is, LOL :)
>
> No, it's much higher than that; I can lie at least a thousand times
> better than Gunner can.  Google itself lies, of course.  It's all part

> of their notorious right wing bias.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

That damn conservative Google.

Laugh..laugh..laugh..

TMT

[Too_Many_Tools]

On May 13, 6:24 pm, Ed Huntress <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2012 23:13:08 +0000 (UTC), Gray Goat (the other white
>
>
>
>
>
> meat) <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> >Benny Fishhole <be...@fakeaddress.edu> wrote in
> >news:lk60r7tshvi3taqdb...@4ax.com:
>
> >> On Sun, 13 May 2012 13:51:12 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>On 5/13/2012 1:26 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:

> >>>>> Gunner Asch<gunnera...@gmail.com>  wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>
> >>>>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), f...@rahul.net (Edward A.
> >>>>> Falk) wrote:
>
> >>>>>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3Wereofftoseethewi...@88.198.244.100>,

> >>>>>> Gray Guest<No_email_for_...@wahoo.com>  wrote:

> Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Well said Ed.

And we still see it here on Usenet...

A little experiment anyone can do...for a month count how many
rightwing spams are posted in a newsgroup versus the leftwing ones.

The number of Right wing spams will be greater...far greater.

TMT



TMT

[Harold Burton]

In article <x5udnd-kFPLkhC3S...@giganews.com>,

Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying.


Try another lie.


snicker

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <9m20r7hlt1p6es6g2...@4ax.com>,
Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>http://twg2a.wordpress.com/tag/snopes-lies/
>
>http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/bill-oreilly-lies-and-misinformation-snopes-lies-and-misinformation-carol-bengle-gilbert-obama-supporter-or-paid-orwellian-editor/

Birther blog reporting that Obama Sr. did not move to Connecticut as Snopes
reports. It looks like Snopes confused Boston with Connecticut. Mistake,
not a lie. Also not particularly important.

>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2307857/posts

Previously covered: Snopes classifies a story of a particularly
difficult school test as 'false', stating "What nearly all
these pundits fail to grasp is "I can't answer these questions" is not
the same thing as "These questions demonstrate that students in earlier
days were better educated than today's students." Just about <I>any</I>
test looks difficult to those who haven't recently been steeped in the
material it covers."


>http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/911-facts/48-911-commentary/5365-snopescom-lies-continues-the-911-cover-up.html

9/11 conspiracy theory stuff that falls squarely in the "Snopes said X
is false, but I believe X so Snopes must be lying." Note also, that if
Snopes *were* lying in this case, it would be in defense of the Bush
administration; not exactly an example of left-wing bias.

>Just a random sampling, I didnt read any of them.

Obviously.

--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 14 May 2012 07:00:11 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
Falk) wrote:

>In article <9m20r7hlt1p6es6g2...@4ax.com>,
>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>http://twg2a.wordpress.com/tag/snopes-lies/
>>
>>http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/bill-oreilly-lies-and-misinformation-snopes-lies-and-misinformation-carol-bengle-gilbert-obama-supporter-or-paid-orwellian-editor/
>
>Birther blog reporting that Obama Sr. did not move to Connecticut as Snopes
>reports. It looks like Snopes confused Boston with Connecticut. Mistake,
>not a lie.

Odd that you call a lie a mistake.

Is there some reason for your redefining what a lie is?

Or is it some wierd Leftwing effort to cover ones ass?

[Gray Guest]

fa...@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote in
news:joqahr$45d$1...@blue-new.rahul.net:

Libs lie. Always, constantly.

It's what they do, it's like breathing to them.

They have to, if they admitted what they were really up to, they would
never get elected. Hell, they wouldn't live very long.

[pyotr filipivich]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on Mon, 14 May 2012 01:28:53 -0700
typed in misc.survivalism the following:

>On Mon, 14 May 2012 07:00:11 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
>Falk) wrote:
>
>>In article <9m20r7hlt1p6es6g2...@4ax.com>,
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>http://twg2a.wordpress.com/tag/snopes-lies/
>>>
>>>http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/bill-oreilly-lies-and-misinformation-snopes-lies-and-misinformation-carol-bengle-gilbert-obama-supporter-or-paid-orwellian-editor/
>>
>>Birther blog reporting that Obama Sr. did not move to Connecticut as Snopes
>>reports. It looks like Snopes confused Boston with Connecticut. Mistake,
>>not a lie.
>
>Odd that you call a lie a mistake.
>
>Is there some reason for your redefining what a lie is?
>
>Or is it some wierd Leftwing effort to cover ones ass?

It is because the left has reached the point where to call
something a "lie"is to be judgmental, which only evil republicans do.
(Be judgmental). Lefties only make mistakes. You know, like how
Corizon (Obama's big bundler of contributions) made a little
accounting mistake with MF Global, and billions of client dollars
disappeared. "Mistakes happen", you know. But only for liberals.

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
Most of the intelligentsia haven't studied history, so much
as they've absorbed the Correct Position on "History".

[RD Sandman]

"dca...@krl.org" <dca...@krl.org> wrote in
news:3e1e0d3f-4461-4300...@f14g2000yqg.googlegroups.com:

> On May 10, 10:13 pm, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On May 10, 2:21 pm, RD Sandman <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Ed Huntress <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote
>> > innews:0cunq7d2bk2c14r67jv2
> 5ubtr1r...@4ax.com:
>>
>> > > On Thu, 10 May 2012 10:19:56 -0700, Hawke
>> > > <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>>
>> > >>On 5/8/2012 10:04 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> > >>> On Tue, 8 May 2012 21:37:59 -0700 (PDT), Too_Many_Tools
>> > >>> <too_many_to...@yahoo.com>  wrote:
>>
>> > >>>> On May 8, 11:11 pm, ogro...@webtv.net (Padraigh ProAmerica)
>> > >>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>> Fox News doesn't have licenses, dumbass.
>>
>> > >>>>> Individual broadcast stations have licenses. Unless Murdoch's
>> > >>>>> nam
> e
>> > >>>>> is on the license, they can't be pulled for anything he did.
>>
>> > >>>>> Cable networks are not licensed.
>>
>> > >>>>> "Too Many Tools= a box of hammers, which you are even dumber
>> > >>>>> th
> an.
>>
>> > >>>>> --
>> > >>>>> "A good march should make a man with a wooden leg want to
>> > >>>>> step out."--
>>
>> > >>>>> John Phillip Sousa
>>
>> > >>>> LOL...looks like you are the dumbass.
>>
>> > >>>> The FBI is already investigating News Corp...criminal charges
>> > >>>> to follow.
>>
>> > >>>> TMT
>>
>> > >>> Fox Broadcasting Company, a subsidiary of News Corp., owns 27
>> > >>> TV stations in the US. News Corp. is publicly traded but
>> > >>> Murdoch owns most of the voting shares. He also is Chairman and
>> > >>> CEO.
>>
>> > >>> So, in theory, the licenses could all be pulled on a
>> > >>> "character" decision against Murdoch. But the FCC very rarely
>> > >>> has used that provision of the Communications Act of 1934 to
>> > >>> actually revoke a license.
>>
>> > >>And this is America where we have a legal system that never holds
>> > >>corporations accountable for anything they do. We also don't
>> > >>prosecut
> e
>> > >>most politicians that commit crimes either. Super rich people are
>> > >>als
> o
>> > >>in a protected class.  So the chances of Newscorp actually
>> > >>getting
> in
>> > >>hot water over this scandal are very slim indeed.
>>
>> > >>Hawke
>>
>> > > Before any of that would be raised as an issue, you have to look
>> > > at the FCC's responsibility to the public and how they implement
>> > > their responsibilities to ensure that broadcasters "serve the
>> > > public interest."
>>
>> > > Given their charge, which includes promoting a diversity of
>> > > opinion and sources of broadcast information, FOX is pretty well
>> > > shielded. Without them there would not be nearly as much
>> > > diversity of opinion o
> n
>> > > the air. And regarding their cable operation, that's a
>> > > free-for-all, anyway, because there are few access limitations as
>> > > there are with broadcast spectrum.

>>
>> > > From any angle, I don't see the FCC revoking the 27 licenses
>> > > owned by News Corp., even if they convicted Murdoch of child
>> > > molestation.
>>

>> > Besides, the FCC doesn't control cable news stations.....only over
>> > the air ones.  The real target of this is Fox News and the FCC has
>> > no licensing power over it.
>>
>> > --
>>
>> > It's too bad the people who really know how to run this
>> > country are so busy cutting hair and driving taxis!!
>>
>> > George Burns
>>
>> > Sleep well, tonight.....
>>
>> > RD (The Sandman)- Hide quoted text -

>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>

>> LOL...so you have proof that Faux News has not tapped phones like
>> News of the World did?
>>
>> And that they have not bribed foreign officials?
>>
>> If so then please present it.
>>
>> Murdoch is sweating for a reason.
>>
>> TMT
>
> So do you have proof that you have not murdered anyone? I bet you do
> not. But if you do please present it.

TMT just has reading comprehension problems. None of what I wrote had
anything to do with whether or not Fox News tapped phones. It had
everything to do with the fact that the FCC has no control over Fox News
as it is a cable entity and does not broadcast over the air where the FCC
holds sway.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)

[Jeff M]

On 5/13/2012 3:25 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

> On May 13, 1:51 pm, Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
>> On 5/13/2012 1:26 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Gunner Asch<gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>

>>>> On Sun, 13 May 2012 16:27:06 +0000 (UTC), f...@rahul.net (Edward A.
>>>> Falk) wrote:
>>
>>>>> In article<XnsA0527ADCE7BA3Wereofftoseethewi...@88.198.244.100>,

>>>>> Gray Guest<No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Plus Snopes is known to have an agenda. On politics they lie as much as
>>>>>> MSNBC.
>>
>>>>> People keep saying that, but they never provide any examples.
>>
>>>>> All the criticisms I see of Snopes boil down to either "they didn't cover
>>>>> my pet peeve, so they're biased" or "they say X isn't true but I believe
>>>>> that it is, so they're liars".
>>
>>>>> So put up: post some examples of Snopes actually lying.
>>
>>>> Google "snopes lies" and we have some 602,000 hits
>>

>>> With THAT many hits, you should be able to come up with just one
>>> "lie."
>>
>>> Let's see it.
>>
>> I Googled "Gunner lies" and got "About 3,650,000 results (0.25 seconds)"

>> I suppose that means he's about six times the liar Snopes is.- Hide quoted text -

>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>

> LOL...good boy Jeff.
>
> I wondering who would come up with that angle.
>
> As Gummer would say...
>
> <VBG>

As I've explained before, I've taken up trying to meet them at their own
level, even if it is a bit of a strain to stoop that low.

[Scout]

<dca...@krl.org> wrote in message
news:aad0a37a-8300-458d...@j25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On May 10, 10:30 pm, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> Meanwhile you can provide the proof that Obama was not born an
>> American.
>>
>> Laugh..laugh..laugh...
>>
>> TMT
>
> I am pretty sure I can find a copy of Obama's birth certificate
> proving that he was born in the U.S.

Sorry, but a copy is only as good as it has been verified against the
original.

[Gray Guest]

"dca...@krl.org" <dca...@krl.org> wrote in news:0cc3011a-8b45-4221-aec6-
2e071e...@l5g2000vbo.googlegroups.com:

> On May 10, 1:23 pm, Hawke <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> I'm just wondering what is the point of wanting Obama's college
>> transcripts. We already know that he graduated from Harvard cum laude,
>> which means he graduated in the top ten percent of his class. As far as
>> I know, that means his grades were very good. What more does anyone need
>> to know than that? And what for?
>>
>> Hawke
>
> Close but no cigar. He graduated from Columbia and was law review at
> Harvard Law School and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law
> School. At least that is what Wiki has.
>
> And Harvard Law School has the following:
>
> . For students who matriculated as of, or after, Fall Term 2008, the
> summa cum laude will be determined by the requirement of a 4.75 GPA.
> The honor is exact and does not involve "rounding off"; ie., a GPA of
> 4.749 does not result in a degree summa cum laude. If, in a given
> year, no student earns a GPA of 4.75 or higher, summa cum laude will
> be awarded to the student (or students in the case of a tie) with the
> highest overall GPA.
>
> 5. The magna cum laude will be awarded to the next ten percent of the
> entire class.
>
> 6. The cum laude will be awarded to the next 30 percent of the entire
> class.
>
> Now that is what is current for Harvard Law School. When Obama
> graduated things might have been different. But currently Magna Cum
> Laude means one graduates in the ten percent of the class that is
> below those that graduate Summa Cum Laude. So Obama could have not
> been in the top 10 percent of class and still graduated Magna Cum
> Laude if the rules were the same when he graduated as they are now.
>
> But you are right. He got good grades and beyond that who cares.
>
> Dan
>
>
>

Unfortuneately Obama has produced nothing to support that.

I care because he's hiding something.

If he has nothing to hide, ...

[Gray Guest]

"Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote in news:65e78f2d-8b5c-4cba-
a3e8-d4f...@h10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:

>
> Offering money to commit a crime is a criminal act.
>
> The transcripts have been sealed by Harvard, Columbia and other
> institutions.
>
> -Ramon
>
>

So is crossing the border not at a designated spot and using someone else's
SSN to get a job. When the fuck did you start caring about the law?

[Gunner Asch]

On Sun, 13 May 2012 13:53:01 -0700 (PDT), JohnJohnsn
<TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>
>>> Like 1960's and 70's official documents written in MS Word?
>>
>> And printed on a lazer printer.....
>>
>Basically; I have no problem with that, as that is the modern way of
>publishing public (or private, in the case of birth and death
>certificates and school transcripts) records which have been stored
>electronically for ease of storage and retrieval.

Chuckle..the problem was...they were alleged to be photostatic copies of
the original forms. NOT stored on electronic media.

<VBG>

Which is why Dan Rather got...shuffled off to banana news...IE retired
for the most part.