Home Mail Discord Chat
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > Washington DC and The Holy Land

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-24-2012, 02:58 PM  
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Factchecker expresses disappointment in our President

Holy tall tales, batman. I guess no one likes a loser.

Posts: 110,255
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 12:27 AM   #31
Aries Walker Aries Walker is offline
Back again, again.
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
The problem you're having is that you think your opinion equals fact. (Or alternatively, you blindly accept the opinions of politifact.org as fact). "Apology tour" is not a lie. Neither is "inches away".
I just use Politifact as a convenient example. Of course, I don't base my entire philosophy on what they say, but they're pretty accurate and not terribly biased, in my experience, so I link to them.

Have you noticed how few politicians level the word "lie"? In the debates, for example, the candidates will say "that's untrue" or "that's not accurate", or maybe even drop "untruth" or the like, but rarely will they level the Big L. I think that's because of how strong a word it is, and the other side of that coin is that when you use it, you have to be sure it's accurate.

I'm seeing in this thread a lot of people using the word "lie" to mean something other than a lie - a mistake, a broken promise, a misguided prediction. In order for a lie to be a lie, the potential liar has to know the truth, and purposefully tell something else instead. It gets complicated in politics, because you have teams of people speaking for each position, and teams of people fact-checking every step, but it can still be spotted easily enough.

"The Tigers take a 1-0 lead," I said. Of course, that's not true, but it's not necessarily a lie. If I heard or said the score wrong, or if this was something I said as a prediction or a calling-my-shot six hours ago, they are all equally wrong, but none of them are a lie. If, however, I just came from si.com, and was deliberately you false information because I had bet you twenty bucks on the Tigers winning last night, then I'm telling a lie.

You all know that already, most likely. So we can apply it to Obama.

His promise to half the debt, and then being unable to, whether it's true or not or whether the President is or isn't to blame, is not a lie. It's a failure.

His pushing the Affordable Care Act as Not A Tax, and then having it ruled as a tax by the Supreme Court, is not a lie, either. It's a bad call.

Benghazi was a stupid decision about embassy security, bad intelligence about the raid, and a certain amount of cluster-f***ery as the administration does some mild panicking at the prospect of bad press two weeks before election day. But none of that means it's a lie; I don't think Obama knew it was terrorism and deliberately said it wasn't to meet some shadowy goal.

The bit about the GM bailout is pretty sketchy. Obama can shrink behind the technicalities, but he played it fast and loose, interpreting it how he wanted in order to score some debate points. So let's enjoy ourselves a little; I'll give you that one. Let's assume that was a malicious lie, filled with foreknowledge, that the President actually told.

It's at this point that I guide you back to Politifact. Romney calls Obama's post-election international speeches the "apology tour", and Politifact does a pretty comprehensive job (which agrees with my opinion) explaining why it's ridiculous. There was no apology tour, there were no apologies, there never were. Politifact had to rate it Pants On Fire four times - and they had already rated in simply False once before - because, despite Politifact and many others calling Romney out on his blatant lies, he continued, and continues, to repeat it.

The "inches away" comment has been debunked by economists both liberal and conservative, and he was busted on that three times as well. Outside of Politifact's scope, the "Believe in America" ad continues to run, as I said before, on Romney's website, even though many have called him out for the egregious misquote. There are many more. Go ahead and read it. I'll wait.

Obama tells his share, too. All politicians do, at some point. He's dropped some doozies and when he does, he deserves to be called on them just like (or perhaps even more than, considering his office) everybody else. But Romney's got volume; he says lies - deliberate ones, remember, where he knows the truth but skips it anyway - and then, when rebutted, repeats them anyway.

To someone like me, misinformation is the worst thing a politician can do. It's even doubly so when it's on purpose, and unapologetic. (You can see me every once in a while pop into a thread in which I'm otherwise disinterested, correct one fact, then pop back out.) I don't know everyone here perfectly, but there's a pretty good chance I pay more attention to fact-checking than anyone else here. Most people here are midwestern Conservatives, and it's natural to protect your home team, but if you look at it objectively, the Right tells far more lies - purposeful, deliberate, calculated lies - than the Left.

Sad, but there it is.
Posts: 7,912
Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Aries Walker has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 07:31 AM   #32
Lex Luthor Lex Luthor is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
"In order for a lie to be a lie, the potential liar has to know the truth, and purposefully tell something else instead." So, your basic argument is that it's not a lie if you believe it to be true. Romney, just like roughly 50% of the voters in this county, considers what Obama did to be an apology tour.

By your own definition Romney was telling the truth.
Posts: 15,993
Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.Lex Luthor is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 07:48 AM   #33
jettio jettio is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Why was Romney even writing an editorial for the Wall Street Journal?

When the auto bailout happened, he was an unelected schmuck on a 7-year campaign for President.

He wrote the article to loudly say that he disagreed with the automakers' requests because he wanted to show how smart he was.

Now Romney tried to claim in the debate that what happened is what he proposed all along. Bullsh*t.

Romney wrote an editorial that he had no business writing as an unelected schmuck. He wrote the editorial to explicitly disagree with the approach taken. Now that the approach taken had excellent results and Michigan and Ohio appreciate those results, Romney is trying to lie and say that it was his idea all along.

In Romney's convention speech, he said that he was rooting for Obama to do well and is now so sad that he has to run against him. That was dishonest, since the 2008 election, Romney has been the standard bearer of the GOP and was doing just as most every other GOP politician was doing, opposing the President on everything, even if it was stuff they would normally vote for.

Romney should have stayed on the sidelines instead of trying to make political hay on the auto industry crisis. It is right and just that he loses Ohio and Michigan, because of his fierce opposition to the course taken.
Posts: 8,284
jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 07:57 AM   #34
LiveSteam LiveSteam is offline
The Constitutional Choo choo
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: homeof43conferencetitles
Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio View Post
Why was Romney even writing an editorial for the Wall Street Journal?

When the auto bailout happened, he was an unelected schmuck on a 7-year campaign for President.

He wrote the article to loudly say that he disagreed with the automakers' requests because he wanted to show how smart he was.

Now Romney tried to claim in the debate that what happened is what he proposed all along. Bullsh*t.

Romney wrote an editorial that he had no business writing as an unelected schmuck. He wrote the editorial to explicitly disagree with the approach taken. Now that the approach taken had excellent results and Michigan and Ohio appreciate those results, Romney is trying to lie and say that it was his idea all along.

In Romney's convention speech, he said that he was rooting for Obama to do well and is now so sad that he has to run against him. That was dishonest, since the 2008 election, Romney has been the standard bearer of the GOP and was doing just as most every other GOP politician was doing, opposing the President on everything, even if it was stuff they would normally vote for.

Romney should have stayed on the sidelines instead of trying to make political hay on the auto industry crisis. It is right and just that he loses Ohio and Michigan, because of his fierce opposition to the course taken.
Do the taxpayers ever get the bail out money back ? You know GM record sales & all
Posts: 39,730
LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 08:07 AM   #35
jettio jettio is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveSteam View Post
Do the taxpayers ever get the bail out money back ? You know GM record sales & all
My understanding is that the govt. got an equity stake in the automakers and that GM and Chrysler have bought back most but not all of the shares.
Posts: 8,284
jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 08:28 AM   #36
petegz28 petegz28 is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Olathe, Ks
Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio View Post
My understanding is that the govt. got an equity stake in the automakers and that GM and Chrysler have bought back most but not all of the shares.
Yeah, us taxpayers are sitting about a $25bil loss
Posts: 109,012
petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 09:21 AM   #37
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by J Diddy View Post
I did not say that it did. I posted the whole thing because the poster in front of me questioned why it was cut off. That and I felt it was entirely unfair to post a soundbyte without the following conclusion and explanation.
It's only unfair if it doesn't accurately reflect what's being presented. In this case, the shorter version was completely accurate.
Posts: 110,255
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 09:23 AM   #38
jettio jettio is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by petegz28 View Post
Yeah, us taxpayers are sitting about a $25bil loss
Why did not Romney state his clear opposition to the auto bailout during Monday's debate on those grounds that you are complaining about?

Why don't you hold your candidate to some minimum standard of candor and truthfulness?

Apparently, you are against the auto bailout and you support Romney because of his fierce opposition to the auto bailout, but you love it when Romney tries to take credit for the auto bailout during the last debate.

Like I said, Romney has been rooting against progress since he lost the nomination to McCain and became the obvious GOP standard bearer for 2012.
Romney lied in his convention speech when he said he was rooting for Obama's success. Romney has been in charge of the GOP since 2009 and he gave the order for GOP to be the obstruction party to keep our nation down so that he would have a better chance to win this election.

It is right and just that Romney lose Ohio and Michigan because Obama took the step that Romney opposed in an editorial that he had no business writing in the first place.
Posts: 8,284
jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.jettio must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 09:29 AM   #39
J Diddy J Diddy is offline
One Groovy Cat
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Pitt State baby
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
It's only unfair if it doesn't accurately reflect what's being presented. In this case, the shorter version was completely accurate.
But yet only showed one view. Don't really understand your oppostion to me posting the whole thing.
Posts: 32,700
J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 09:50 AM   #40
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aries Walker View Post
I just use Politifact as a convenient example. Of course, I don't base my entire philosophy on what they say, but they're pretty accurate and not terribly biased, in my experience, so I link to them.

Have you noticed how few politicians level the word "lie"? In the debates, for example, the candidates will say "that's untrue" or "that's not accurate", or maybe even drop "untruth" or the like, but rarely will they level the Big L. I think that's because of how strong a word it is, and the other side of that coin is that when you use it, you have to be sure it's accurate.

I'm seeing in this thread a lot of people using the word "lie" to mean something other than a lie - a mistake, a broken promise, a misguided prediction. In order for a lie to be a lie, the potential liar has to know the truth, and purposefully tell something else instead. It gets complicated in politics, because you have teams of people speaking for each position, and teams of people fact-checking every step, but it can still be spotted easily enough.

"The Tigers take a 1-0 lead," I said. Of course, that's not true, but it's not necessarily a lie. If I heard or said the score wrong, or if this was something I said as a prediction or a calling-my-shot six hours ago, they are all equally wrong, but none of them are a lie. If, however, I just came from si.com, and was deliberately you false information because I had bet you twenty bucks on the Tigers winning last night, then I'm telling a lie.

You all know that already, most likely. So we can apply it to Obama.

His promise to half the debt, and then being unable to, whether it's true or not or whether the President is or isn't to blame, is not a lie. It's a failure.

His pushing the Affordable Care Act as Not A Tax, and then having it ruled as a tax by the Supreme Court, is not a lie, either. It's a bad call.

Benghazi was a stupid decision about embassy security, bad intelligence about the raid, and a certain amount of cluster-f***ery as the administration does some mild panicking at the prospect of bad press two weeks before election day. But none of that means it's a lie; I don't think Obama knew it was terrorism and deliberately said it wasn't to meet some shadowy goal.

The bit about the GM bailout is pretty sketchy. Obama can shrink behind the technicalities, but he played it fast and loose, interpreting it how he wanted in order to score some debate points. So let's enjoy ourselves a little; I'll give you that one. Let's assume that was a malicious lie, filled with foreknowledge, that the President actually told.

It's at this point that I guide you back to Politifact. Romney calls Obama's post-election international speeches the "apology tour", and Politifact does a pretty comprehensive job (which agrees with my opinion) explaining why it's ridiculous. There was no apology tour, there were no apologies, there never were. Politifact had to rate it Pants On Fire four times - and they had already rated in simply False once before - because, despite Politifact and many others calling Romney out on his blatant lies, he continued, and continues, to repeat it.

The "inches away" comment has been debunked by economists both liberal and conservative, and he was busted on that three times as well. Outside of Politifact's scope, the "Believe in America" ad continues to run, as I said before, on Romney's website, even though many have called him out for the egregious misquote. There are many more. Go ahead and read it. I'll wait.

Obama tells his share, too. All politicians do, at some point. He's dropped some doozies and when he does, he deserves to be called on them just like (or perhaps even more than, considering his office) everybody else. But Romney's got volume; he says lies - deliberate ones, remember, where he knows the truth but skips it anyway - and then, when rebutted, repeats them anyway.

To someone like me, misinformation is the worst thing a politician can do. It's even doubly so when it's on purpose, and unapologetic. (You can see me every once in a while pop into a thread in which I'm otherwise disinterested, correct one fact, then pop back out.) I don't know everyone here perfectly, but there's a pretty good chance I pay more attention to fact-checking than anyone else here. Most people here are midwestern Conservatives, and it's natural to protect your home team, but if you look at it objectively, the Right tells far more lies - purposeful, deliberate, calculated lies - than the Left.

Sad, but there it is.
I agree with you about the distinction between a "lie" and an unintentional or unknowing untruth. That said, let me rephrase a part of post 26:

Quote:
"Apology tour" is not a lie and it's not even untrue. Neither is "inches away".
You are blinded by your political bias and your personal opinions. That's why your "experience" leads you to believe that politifact is pretty accurate and not terribly biased despite the dubious nature of their incredibly lopsided record of applying "pants on fire" ratings to Republicans a lot more often than to democrats. You conclude that it's because Republicans lie more. I conclude that you're lying to yourself (or at least unintentionally telling yourself falsehoods).

You see, whether or not Obama was apologizing is a matter of opinion, not fact. If he were accused of using the word "apology" on this tour, it would be a matter of fact that could be checked and determined to be true or false. But apologies don't require a magic word or a particular formulation. Apologies are in the eye of the beholder. Would-be fact checkers can lay out the facts and leave it up to the reader to decide (a "we report, you decide" approach, ), but it's not a matter about which they can legitimately declare true or false or pants on fire. In the *opinion* of the reporter from politifact, Obama didn't apologize and you agree with that opinion, which is fine. But an opinion to the contrary is not incorrect. I've read that politifact article and I found it unpersuasive. That's my bias and opinion.

The same is true in the "inches away" statement. How can that be anything other than opinion? How do you measure that in inches anyway? Some people think we've already lost our free market. Others think we're far from doing so. It's about as far from a fact that can be checked as you can get.

It's hard to argue that the issue discussed by Letterman is not a real fact. Did Romney say that his plan included government help or not. The President said no, but a review of the Governor's op-ed proves that he did. Obama may not have been lying, he might have just been misinformed. But any time someone is so confident in their assertion that they challenge you to check them on it, it looks pretty bad when they turn out to be wrong. That's why Letterman was disappointed.

BTW, has Obama apologized for this or even acknowledged that he was wrong?
Posts: 110,255
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 10:00 AM   #41
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio View Post
Why was Romney even writing an editorial for the Wall Street Journal?

When the auto bailout happened, he was an unelected schmuck on a 7-year campaign for President.

He wrote the article to loudly say that he disagreed with the automakers' requests because he wanted to show how smart he was.

Now Romney tried to claim in the debate that what happened is what he proposed all along. Bullsh*t.

Romney wrote an editorial that he had no business writing as an unelected schmuck. He wrote the editorial to explicitly disagree with the approach taken. Now that the approach taken had excellent results and Michigan and Ohio appreciate those results, Romney is trying to lie and say that it was his idea all along.

In Romney's convention speech, he said that he was rooting for Obama to do well and is now so sad that he has to run against him. That was dishonest, since the 2008 election, Romney has been the standard bearer of the GOP and was doing just as most every other GOP politician was doing, opposing the President on everything, even if it was stuff they would normally vote for.

Romney should have stayed on the sidelines instead of trying to make political hay on the auto industry crisis. It is right and just that he loses Ohio and Michigan, because of his fierce opposition to the course taken.
In our country, even unelected schmucks are allowed to get their opinions published. It's part of a tradition we call free speech. You must have slept through those classes in law school.

When Romney wrote that op-ed, the plan to save the auto companies consisted of giving them money so they could continue to pay their bills. Romney was advocating a bankruptcy proceeding. In the end, the Obama administration put GM through a quasi-bankruptcy process. They probably would have done it anyway without Romney's suggestion, but Romney planted his stake before the government figured out what it was going to do.

Furthermore, the kind of heavy-handed, extra-legal bankruptcy managed by Obama is not the traditional bankruptcy that Romney recommended and I'm sure he still believes that his approach, while similar in many respects,* would have been superior.


_______________
* Similar enough that it would be hard to explain the difference to the public in sound bites.
Posts: 110,255
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 10:08 AM   #42
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by J Diddy View Post
But yet only showed one view. Don't really understand your oppostion to me posting the whole thing.
I don't have any opposition to you posting the whole thing. But since you didn't bother to mention that it doesn't undermine the original point in any way, I wanted to make that clear for anyone who didn't bother to watch both videos.

Someone might come along and see a second "rest of the interview" video posted and assume, without watching it, that it debunks the prior assertion since there really isn't any other reason to post it.
Posts: 110,255
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 10:12 AM   #43
J Diddy J Diddy is offline
One Groovy Cat
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Pitt State baby
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I don't have any opposition to you posting the whole thing. But since you didn't bother to mention that it doesn't undermine the original point in any way, I wanted to make that clear for anyone who didn't bother to watch both videos.

Someone might come along and see a second "rest of the interview" video posted and assume, without watching it, that it debunks the prior assertion since there really isn't any other reason to post it.
Like I said, I gave reasons for why I posted it. Cosmo's assertion that it was odd that it ended right there and then the opportunity for her to comment on Letterman's statement. Yes it did say basically what you said. However you said it in a black and white context, when it was not. She explained that as well.
Posts: 32,700
J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 10:22 AM   #44
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by J Diddy View Post
Like I said, I gave reasons for why I posted it. Cosmo's assertion that it was odd that it ended right there and then the opportunity for her to comment on Letterman's statement. Yes it did say basically what you said. However you said it in a black and white context, when it was not. She explained that as well.
It was black and white. What she "explained" was what might have been going on in his mind when he told a black and white falsehood. Her characterizations are highly debatable, but since it's not really relevant to the thread topic they're beside the point.
Posts: 110,255
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 10:27 AM   #45
Hoover Hoover is offline
Rufus Dawes Jr.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Just so y'all know, the newspaper is usually the one that assigns the headline to an op-ed, not the guy who wrote it. Plus "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" was nowhere in the text of the op-ed.
Posts: 14,541
Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.Hoover is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.