Reply With Quote
I get it.
So, is there anything that would make this a big deal, to you?
To me, it is.
I get it.
So, is there anything that would make this a big deal, to you?
The disclosed information is pretty puny. That's enough for me. No need to speculate about non-existent aggravating cir stances.
Massive Vote Fraud would make it a big deal, but there is zero evidence of that.
It's just another story you hope gets bigger.
It's what we do.
It's what you do.
Did President Bush lie us into a war in Iraq? Don't worry, I'm not ChumpDumping you.
Those who do, merely speculate and, have less proof than I do of Obama's lies on health care alone.
Great moments in gatekeeping
If the Federalist Society, which got a heaping helping of demonization during the John Roberts and Samuel Alito confirmation hearings, started giving advice to prospective pimps and hookers on tax evasion and hiding child-pros ution rings, does anyone think that the Charlie Gibsons and the Papers of Record in the US would let that slide to the cable networks? Or would it headline their outlets, complete with a dissection of Federalist Society support for Republicans?
Eh, his administration said they knew exactly where the WMDs were. So they either lied or were colossally inept. I'd believe either explanation.
Bush was dishonest, and our casus belli in Iraq was a piece of crap. Iraq was no threat to us, as the war itself proved, the Al Qaeda tie was bogus, and the WMD issue, totally trumped up. Bush did well to avoid technical lies most of the time, but to suggest that the way he led us to war was completely honorable and honest is really too much for me.
Like Bush, Obama relies on some iffy advice and some cherry-picked assumptions for the claims he makes. For Bush, this sort of CYA was unassailable: he got bad advice. But for Obama, somehow, it only proves his mendacity. And your confirmation bias.
To me, both are weasels. But to you, your side can do no wrong.
About what?
Over a couple of dozen UNSC Resolutions and the AUMF in Iraq tend to disagree with this assessment.
Unlike Obama's many follies, there was almost no one that disagreed with the assessment President Bush made about Iraq -- up until he decided to invade. It's already been investigated and determined the Bush administration did not skew the intelligence that everyone, including Congress and Ms. Pelosi, saw that informed his decision to invade Iraq.
We've posted the videos and quotes in here, ad nausea, of his harshest critics agreeing with him prior to March of 2003.
We've had this discussion and I've already given you two examples of where I vehemently disagreed with Bush. No, don't Chump me. Okay?
I won't go point for point, i'm tired. But i'll say this. Your reply to me is a bunch of happy horse . When I get back from my trip to Corpus I'll be happy to lay it all out for you.
Love Corpus! Going to Port A or the beach?
Have a safe trip.
Business. No beach. Bummer universe.
Well, be safe.
Were there any actual pros utes involved? Or was the crime purely notional?
No pros utes but, that wasn't known to the ACORN employees who were willing to help who they thought was a real pros ute wanting to set up a child brothel.
This wasn't a criminal sting so, save your legal discussion. These people were willing to help shelter a child brothel, pure and simple.
No Harm No Foul...
Give 'em back all the govt money/contracts, whatever. These people are doing good work.
If an ACORN employee admitted to committing premeditated murder on the tape, would that be news, WineHole23?
There was no crime - well, except for the illegal eaves-dropping, and slander when this kid chopped this film together to cut out the parts where the ACORN guys were laughing at him..
Acorn"They were not believable", said Ms. Kaelke of the two actors. "Somewhat entertaining, but they weren't even good actors. I didn't know what to make of them. They were clearly playing with me. I decided to shock them as much as they were shocking me. Like Stephan Colbert does – saying the most outrageous things with a straight face. While her sense of humor might not be funny to many people, the fact is that she spun false scenario after false scenario and the videographer ate them up.
For example, in response to the set-up by the filmmakers in which they say they are trying get the young woman away from her abusive pimp, she responds that she was abused by her former husband as well (true) and that she shot and killed him (false). He is very much alive and living near Barstow, CA ...
This makes more sense than thinking that anyone believed their 1970's pimp/pros ute get up and the story that followed.
I wouldn't doubt it if this kid is attacked on a bus soon....
NewshoundsAs Media Matters reported, Fox News followed in lockstep with Glenn Beck in making ACORN, rather than health care, their top story of the day, yesterday (9/10/09), one day after President Obama delivered his major address on health care reform. Media Matters counted at least 17 segments on six programs devoted to airing and discussing portions of a video made by anti-choice zealot James O’Keefe who specializes in using deceptive practices to trick his targets into embarrassing themselves. In this case, O’Keefe and partner Hanah Giles posed as a pimp and pros ute looking for tax advice from ACORN’s tax preparation service. O'Keefe said his goal was "posing the most ridiculous criminal scenario we could think of and seeing if they would comply.” Predictably, Sean Hannity was so enthusiastic about the prospect of smearing ACORN – and President Obama along with it – that he failed to tell the “we report, you decide” network’s viewers that the filmmakers reportedly went to several ACORN offices, where their ploy was unsuccessful, before finding someone to fall for their scheme. Hannity also failed to mention O’Keefe’s background, including the fact that he admits to using the tactics of Saul Alinsky, the radical Fox is always throwing in President Obama’s face. Instead, activist O’Keefe was presented as an “independent filmmaker.” With video
As Foxnews.com reported, an ACORN spokesman has said that O’Keefe’s film crew “tried to pull this sham at other offices and failed.” How many times did O’Keefe try his charade before he found someone who took the bait? We never learned. Hannity never even bothered to tell his audience about ACORN’s response to the video. It certainly wasn’t for lack of airtime. The video was discussed repeatedly during the show, including a “Fox News alert” at the start. I’m sure all that attention for the film had nothing to do with the fact that Obama’s health care speech was very enthusiastically received by the public nor that another 6 advertisers – bringing the total to 62 – have reportedly pledged not to advertise further on the Glenn Beck show.
Instead of revealing O’Keefe’s background or the context and history of his video, Hannity described it as an “undercover investigation conducted by filmmaker James O’Keefe.”
On hand to promote the video were Andrew Breitbart and Michael Flynn whose new website claims to be dedicated to fighting big government. Yet it has devoted about 90% of its two pages to attacking ACORN.
First, Breitbart preened about the supposed importance of this gotcha by sneering, “Congratulations to 60 Minutes and CBS for having the guts to take on ACORN.” Gee, Andrew, do you think that maybe they thought there might be more important issues to cover – like health care reform? Funny how I didn't see much, if any, coverage on your site about that.
Breitbart went on to brag about the two “intrepid” investigators, and described O’Keefe as “well on his way to being one of the great journalists.” Except, Andrew, “great journalists” usually report their complete findings – like how many times they visited ACORN before they found a taker. Breitbart, who should know something about journalistic ethics either doesn’t or pretends otherwise. “He (O’Keefe) went into ACORN thinking that there was gonna be something like this and he certainly found it… Every step of the way these (ACORN) people… participated and upped the ante, and I’m just here to tell you that James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles are heroes for doing this because we all knew that this is what happens at ACORN, to a degree.”
Nice little wiggle words, “to a degree,” there, Andrew. I mean, we could say that we know that withholding information from the public is what happens whenever Breitbart goes on the air, to a degree.
Hannity, never at a loss for his own self-importance, announced that the show would later go into the “criminal issues.” But somehow nobody ever got around to mentioning the potential criminal liability of those great journalists because it's a crime in Maryland to record someone without their permission.
Meanwhile, Hannity and Flynn lamented that ACORN gets “millions of dollars” from the US government. Funny, ACORN received $13 million from the Bush administration and I never saw anyone, in more than 5 years of watching "fair and balanced" Fox News have a care about that.
Flynn also ignored that O’Keefe and Giles may now be criminally liable. Instead, he insisted that ACORN owed them an apology (for saying they had engaged in “gotcha journalism,” which, by their own admission, they had) and also suggested that ACORN should thank them “for rooting out these employees.” Yeah, and I think Breitbart should be thanking me for helping him root out his journalistic transgressions.
Sure enough, Hannity soon used the issue to start up his McCarthyesque witch hunt against Obama, who, even Hannity would have to admit, had absolutely nothing to do with this incident. But that didn't stop Hannity from suggesting otherwise. “We had a media that ignored Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and Rev. Wright and Pfleger. We had a mainstream media that… ignored (Van) Jones, we have Eric Holdren (I believe Hannity meant John Holdren), we have Cass Sunstein. We have a lot of radicals surrounding this president.”
Kind of like we have a lot of bigots surrounding Hannity?
“But (Obama) was once the lawyer for them,” Hannity accused. “Does this connect back to the President of the United States in your mind?” he asked Breitbart.
Breitbart said he would not “get into how this relates to the president” and then he did exactly that. “What we’re seeing here, though… is more of an outrage against the mainstream media… They didn’t vet this president… or the people who are running this government and, quite frankly, taking it over… Now we understand what a community organizer is, period.”
I always though this world was in the toilet. Just further proof of how idiotic the general public is and the select few who use this garbage as some kind of vessel to hate on Obama. I really can't even consider these TV shock jocks to be "media" or "news" outlets anymore. To report on this as if its some kind of breaking news or to broadcast this as some kind of lid being blown off a massive conspiracy has to be some of the most irresponsible disgraceful displays of stupidity and desperation. What a slap in the face of their profession. Their craft.
It's all "news." And yes, premeditated murder would be much more serious than intended pandering. But that isn't the case. The sting pitches a dumb idea and got some dumb people to go along with the dumb idea. The idea that it amounts to a scheme to promote pros ution is more than a little bit strained. We'll see if charges actually stick.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
