First CBS, and now ABC
Proton Soup
What the hell are they thinking?
http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm
-----------
Proton Soup
"Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum."
Don
says...
Fox makes up quotes, gets caught, and apologizes. No one fired.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1319075,00.html
Proton Soup
I'd like to read the original article that started the controversy.
Kinda funny though that you're quoting a Brit tabloid, and not a US
news site. Probably most people here would have read it as a joke and
not thought much of it.
And isn't metrosexual a term that originated in London, anyhow? Metro
is what they call their subway.
Don
says...
The talk radio folks were treating it as straight news. It wasn't too over the
top, I can see Kerry getting a manicure. Of course the article was pulled.
I just googled quick on kerry, fox, metrosexual, and the Guardian was the
first one from a recognizable source. Fox News has nothing on it now, of
course.
-Don
Peter Allen
news:aeqem09l0el0f8n96...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 04:04:35 GMT, annoy...@comcast.net (Don) wrote:
>
> >In article <n8bem0lv2f3geld1u...@4ax.com>, pro...@soup.org
> >says...
> >>
> >>
> >>What the hell are they thinking?
> >>
> >>http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm
> >>
> >>-----------
> >>Proton Soup
> >>
> >>"Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum."
> >
> >Fox makes up quotes, gets caught, and apologizes. No one fired.
> >
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1319075,00.html
>
> I'd like to read the original article that started the controversy.
> Kinda funny though that you're quoting a Brit tabloid,
Broadsheet. Fairly well respected, definitely liberal. Currently supports
the Lib Dems if anyone (if that's any help..)
> and not a US
> news site. Probably most people here would have read it as a joke and
> not thought much of it.
>
> And isn't metrosexual a term that originated in London, anyhow? Metro
> is what they call their subway.
The London Underground is NOT called the metro. It's usually shortened to
'the Underground'.
Peter
Hugh Beyer
news:PdK9d.438897$8_6.316161@attbi_s04:
I can see any politician, or anyone who needs to look good in public,
getting a manicure. It goes with pancake makeup. Grow up, guys.
Hugh
--
One puppy had its dewclaws removed in the creation of this post, but for
reasons of hygene and it really doesn't hurt them at all.
Hugh Beyer
> What the hell are they thinking?
>
> http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm
>
There's been a lot of criticism of the press coverage of politics over the
last few elections, saying that reporters seek "balance" even when reality
isn't balanced. So if politician A tells an out-and-out lie (e.g. "I never
saw you in the Senate") and politician B stretches the truth a bit (e.g.
"We've spent $200 billion on this war" when we've spent $120 billion and
allocated another $80 billion for next year), the headline the next day
reads: "Both sides stretch the truth in fiery debate".
It was stupid to write the memo so it sounded so partisan, but I think the
basic message is a good thing.
DHW
>> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1319075,00.html
>>
>> I'd like to read the original article that started the controversy.
>> Kinda funny though that you're quoting a Brit tabloid,
>
>Broadsheet. Fairly well respected, definitely liberal. Currently supports
>the Lib Dems if anyone (if that's any help..)
>
>> and not a US
>> news site. Probably most people here would have read it as a joke and
>> not thought much of it.
>>
>> And isn't metrosexual a term that originated in London, anyhow? Metro
>> is what they call their subway.
>
>The London Underground is NOT called the metro. It's usually shortened to
>'the Underground'.
>
>Peter
>
Both Kerry and Bush have been in Central Ohio lately. And, oddly
enough I happened to be at the Hilliard World Gym on the same days
both candidates were there working out.
As I recall Bush was there on a Friday. Maybe Thursday. I'm pretty
sure it was toward the end of the week. Bush was wearing an older 'Big
Dog' t-shirt that had the sleves ripped off. In between sets Bush
would talk with some of the other gym rats and commented on what 'hard
work' lifting is and how much safer World Gym feels now that we've
declared war on terror. He also asked one of the trainers for tips on
toning.
I didn't stick around for his whole workout. I was put off by the
constant screaming of the Secret Service agents as they spotted W on
the bench. "PUSH IT MR. PRESIDENT!!! YOU SLIMEBALL!! GIVE ME TWO MORE!
YOU ... ARE ... PATHETIC."
Geroge was hitting about 280 in sets on the bench.
He didn't rack his weights when he was done. I hate that. (He used
the squat rack for curls too.)
Kerry walked in one day when I was getting ready to leave. I didn't
notice whether or not he was freshly manicured, though he did smell of
lilac.
Even though I was running late getting back to work I thought I'd hang
around and see what Kerry was made of. He made himself at home in one
of the power cages got busy squatting. I saw him kick out a set of 8
at 425 lbs (ass to the grass) without breaking a sweat. The man was
just getting warmed up when my cell phone went off and I had to hit
the road.
As I walked out the door I could see John racking his weights.
[Of course, in order to avoid any type of reprimand, by either Fox
News or the members of MFW, I must admit I made most of the above up.
Bush and Kerry have been in town recently ... but that's where the
truth ends.]
D. Wells
d...@987vanner987.com
Remove the numbers to mail me. Include the text "gore-in-2004"
(without quotation marks) to ensure you make it past the spam filter.
Proton Soup
wrote:
Probably just a punchy reporter who'd had a couple of beers. In the
future, they might want to have an editor review stuff before it gets
posted to the website.
>I can see any politician, or anyone who needs to look good in public,
>getting a manicure. It goes with pancake makeup. Grow up, guys.
Don't forget the hair helmet.
DRS
news:Xns957D833BE7A7E...@216.196.97.142
[...]
> There's been a lot of criticism of the press coverage of politics
> over the last few elections, saying that reporters seek "balance"
> even when reality isn't balanced. So if politician A tells an
> out-and-out lie (e.g. "I never saw you in the Senate") and politician
> B stretches the truth a bit (e.g. "We've spent $200 billion on this
> war" when we've spent $120 billion and allocated another $80 billion
> for next year), the headline the next day reads: "Both sides stretch
> the truth in fiery debate".
Thank you, Chief Rabbi. For another point of view, I spoke earlier to
Reinhard Heydrich, Chair of the Nazi Party's Bureau for Jewish Affairs...
--
"There isn't a finite amount of oil in the Earth. It keeps being produced."
John Hanson
John M. Williams
>Proton Soup <pro...@soup.org> wrote:
>
>> What the hell are they thinking?
>>
>> http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm
>>
>
>There's been a lot of criticism of the press coverage of politics over the
>last few elections, saying that reporters seek "balance" even when reality
>isn't balanced. So if politician A tells an out-and-out lie (e.g. "I never
>saw you in the Senate")
Do lies include blatant misquotes like the above?
Hugh Beyer
Yer just jealous. Certainly I am.
Hugh Beyer
news:72bgm0l3fqh614feq...@4ax.com:
All paraphrased from memory. I think I got the substance right. Post the
actual quote in contrast if you think I didn't.
The Queen of Cans and Jars
Hugh Beyer
@lust.ihug.co.nz:
> "Hugh Beyer" <beyer...@acm.org> wrote in message
> news:Xns957D833BE7A7E...@216.196.97.142
>
> [...]
>
>> There's been a lot of criticism of the press coverage of politics
>> over the last few elections, saying that reporters seek "balance"
>> even when reality isn't balanced. So if politician A tells an
>> out-and-out lie (e.g. "I never saw you in the Senate") and politician
>> B stretches the truth a bit (e.g. "We've spent $200 billion on this
>> war" when we've spent $120 billion and allocated another $80 billion
>> for next year), the headline the next day reads: "Both sides stretch
>> the truth in fiery debate".
>
> Thank you, Chief Rabbi. For another point of view, I spoke earlier to
> Reinhard Heydrich, Chair of the Nazi Party's Bureau for Jewish Affairs...
>
Quick, get him some creatine, he's gone non-linear again.
tacitrati
> John M. Williams <jmwil...@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in
> news:72bgm0l3fqh614feq...@4ax.com:
>
> > Hugh Beyer <beyer...@acm.org> wrote:
> >>Proton Soup <pro...@soup.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What the hell are they thinking?
> >>>
> >>> http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm
> >>>
> >>
> >>There's been a lot of criticism of the press coverage of politics over
the
> >>last few elections, saying that reporters seek "balance" even when
reality
> >>isn't balanced. So if politician A tells an out-and-out lie (e.g. "I
never
> >>saw you in the Senate")
> >
> > Do lies include blatant misquotes like the above?
> >
>
> All paraphrased from memory. I think I got the substance right. Post the
> actual quote in contrast if you think I didn't.
>
> Hugh
first of all, he said "met" not saw.
second of all, the claim MAY have been erroneous. it does not follow that
it's a LIE. first of all, he didn't clarify whether he meant "met him on
the floor of the senate", or met him anywhere (apparently they were seated
next to each other at some dinner function once, and they may or may not
have been introduced ie MET each other). so, if he met him OFF the senate
floor that might be irrelevant. he WAS talking about AT the senate.
and even if they did meet on the floor, if cheney did not remember it, then
it's not a lie - a lie is an intentional misstatement
of course, the underlying fact that edwards has a phenomenally bad
attendance record in the senate is not in question, btw.
you are attacking a statement as a lie when you don't know it's a lie.
heck, you don't even know what he SAID. talk about LACK OF BALANCE. i am
sure that before you accused edwards of "lying" you would at least research
and get your facts straight
whit
John M. Williams
>John M. Williams <jmwil...@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in
>news:72bgm0l3fqh614feq...@4ax.com:
>
>> Hugh Beyer <beyer...@acm.org> wrote:
>>>Proton Soup <pro...@soup.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What the hell are they thinking?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.drudgereport.com/mh.htm
>>>>
>>>
>>>There's been a lot of criticism of the press coverage of politics over the
>>>last few elections, saying that reporters seek "balance" even when reality
>>>isn't balanced. So if politician A tells an out-and-out lie (e.g. "I never
>>>saw you in the Senate")
>>
>> Do lies include blatant misquotes like the above?
>
>All paraphrased from memory. I think I got the substance right. Post the
>actual quote in contrast if you think I didn't.
"The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage
tonight."
John M. Williams
>
>you are attacking a statement as a lie when you don't know it's a lie.
>heck, you don't even know what he SAID. talk about LACK OF BALANCE. i am
>sure that before you accused edwards of "lying" you would at least research
>and get your facts straight
>
>whit
Which takes us full circle to the original subject header: liberals
and predominantly liberal news organizations will conclusively presume
that anything false stated by Kerry or Edwards is a misstatement or
misinterpretation, while anything false stated by Bush or Cheney is a
scurrilous lie.
I just don't see nearly so many conservatives, or predominantly
conservative commentators, stating the converse.
Jim
"John M. Williams" <jmwil...@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:21jgm05766s5jfme1...@4ax.com...
I sure as hell do. Oh wait..you dont watch Faux News John.
Jim
John M. Williams
>"John M. Williams" <jmwil...@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:
>> "tacitrati" <ta...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >you are attacking a statement as a lie when you don't know it's a lie.
>> >heck, you don't even know what he SAID. talk about LACK OF BALANCE. i
>> >am sure that before you accused edwards of "lying" you would at least
>> >research and get your facts straight
>>
>> and predominantly liberal news organizations will conclusively presume
>> that anything false stated by Kerry or Edwards is a misstatement or
>> misinterpretation, while anything false stated by Bush or Cheney is a
>> scurrilous lie.
>>
>> I just don't see nearly so many conservatives, or predominantly
>> conservative commentators, stating the converse.
>
>I sure as hell do. Oh wait..you dont watch Faux News John.
I check the website occasionally. I still don't see that.
FWIW, I also check the websites for the BBC and the Sydney Morning
Herald to get a broad sense of opinion.
Maybe you should start getting your news from someplace OTHER than Fox
and Limbaugh. You might actually learn something, rather than just
screaming about bias and assuming that the opposite is always true.
Hugh Beyer
news:RAX9d.7757$UP...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
Pooh, quit slicing the words so fine you can read through them. Next
you'll be telling us what "is" is.
I will admit it wasn't the greatest example and that there is a real,
though minor and irrelevant in this case, difference between "met" and
"saw". And Cheney's memory could be failing him. But if you're going to
say something like that on national TV you'd better be dead sure you're
right. Or else say "I don't recall ever having met you..."
Anyway, all this is peripheral to MY point, that the function of the press
is report accurately how the statements compare against the facts, even if
this means they are more critical of one side than the other.
Hugh