A British Open Double Bogey
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Ping Alan Baker
Next: Where is the old boy today?
From: William Clark on 1 Aug 2010 11:10 In article <4c54edd6$0$4970$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:43:57 -0400, BAR wrote: > > In article <wclark2-5C18F7.12513931072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > >> In article <4c536b4e$0$4970$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > >> Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:37:55 -0500, MNMikeW wrote: > >>>> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > >>>> news:alangbaker-C06CE9.13143130072010(a)news.shawcable.com... > >>>>> In article <8bgpttFmcfU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" > >>>>> <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > >>>>>> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > >>>>>> news:alangbaker-EDCC5B.13025030072010(a)news.shawcable.com... > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> The full video is 43 minutes long. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9NcCa_KjXk> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Don't you think a real journalist would have reviewed that > >>>>>>> before putting up cherry-picked sections of it and passing > >>>>>>> judgement? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> What makes you think he didn't have the whole video? > >>>>> > >>>>> If he did, that makes his actions even worse, because it has been > >>>>> pretty much universally agreed that anyone who has seen the whole > >>>>> video could never have made the claims of racism that Breitbart > >>>>> made. > >>>>> > >>>>> You're really digging yourself a hole here, Mike, and for what? > >>>>> > >>>> I not digging anything. Breitbart is attempting to show racism at > >>>> the NAACP, not specifically to Sherrod. Whether you think he does > >>>> or does not accomplish this is debatable. > >>> > >>> He was attempting to smear the NAACP, not "show racism." Look at his > >>> deliberately misleading excerpt. Then look at the full video. Unless > >>> you're totally demented you'll be able to see what he did. > >> > >> I think you've hit the nail on the head with the "demented" bit :-) > > > > By definition the NAACP is a racist organization. > > I'm almost afraid to ask, but: which definition would that be? His.
From: William Clark on 1 Aug 2010 11:11 In article <MPG.26be9aab4c6257d298a16b(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <wclark2-513B7C.17363431072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > In article <MPG.26be2a79e87bedb698a163(a)news.giganews.com>, > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > In article <wclark2-479852.12420731072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > > > > > In article <MPG.26bd1fd6d79af2ab98a156(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > In article <aij6569cpam0ad72mac777mo5cqji2gjen(a)4ax.com>, > > > > > bknight(a)conramp.net says... > > > > > > >> The White House has apologized. Breitbart, who started the > > > > > > >> mess, > > > > > > >> hasn't. He's an idiot. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Has every press outlet apologized for each and every mistake they > > > > > > >have > > > > > > >ever made? No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for admitting he made a mistake. > > > > > > > > > > I made no such admission. I asked a question and answered the > > > > > question. > > > > > > > > > > > >Stop acting like a spoiled child. > > > > > > > > > > > > Wanting someone to own up is acting like a spoiled child? > > > > > > Oh, its Bert. I forgot. > > > > > > > > > > You are forgetting that the press cherry picks bits and pieces of > > > > > interviews and videos to bias what they present each and every day. > > > > > The > > > > > fact that you won't admit that this SOP is laughable. > > > > > > > > So is Breitbart a deliberate liar or not? Simple moral question - yes > > > > or > > > > no will do. > > > > > > Breitbart is a publisher and he made a business decision just like the > > > NYT, WaPo and other media outlets. > > > > > > Judgement on Breitbart's using your moral question is irrelevant. > > > > > > Remember, government censor, businesses make decisions. > > > > So did he lie with the intention of misrepresenting the NAACP and Ms. > > Sherrod or not? Simple question. Have the cojones to answer it. > > He made a business decision. OK, so you simply refuse to see this as a total distortion of the truth for political ends. Just goes to show how much any of your "opinions" are worth. Absolutely nothing from a moral midget.
From: William Clark on 1 Aug 2010 11:12 In article <alangbaker-C2904A.23124331072010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article <MPG.26be9aab4c6257d298a16b(a)news.giganews.com>, > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > In article <wclark2-513B7C.17363431072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > > > In article <MPG.26be2a79e87bedb698a163(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > In article <wclark2-479852.12420731072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > > > > > > > In article <MPG.26bd1fd6d79af2ab98a156(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > In article <aij6569cpam0ad72mac777mo5cqji2gjen(a)4ax.com>, > > > > > > bknight(a)conramp.net says... > > > > > > > >> The White House has apologized. Breitbart, who started the > > > > > > > >> mess, > > > > > > > >> hasn't. He's an idiot. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Has every press outlet apologized for each and every mistake > > > > > > > >they > > > > > > > >have > > > > > > > >ever made? No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for admitting he made a mistake. > > > > > > > > > > > > I made no such admission. I asked a question and answered the > > > > > > question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Stop acting like a spoiled child. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wanting someone to own up is acting like a spoiled child? > > > > > > > Oh, its Bert. I forgot. > > > > > > > > > > > > You are forgetting that the press cherry picks bits and pieces of > > > > > > interviews and videos to bias what they present each and every day. > > > > > > The > > > > > > fact that you won't admit that this SOP is laughable. > > > > > > > > > > So is Breitbart a deliberate liar or not? Simple moral question - yes > > > > > or > > > > > no will do. > > > > > > > > Breitbart is a publisher and he made a business decision just like the > > > > NYT, WaPo and other media outlets. > > > > > > > > Judgement on Breitbart's using your moral question is irrelevant. > > > > > > > > Remember, government censor, businesses make decisions. > > > > > > So did he lie with the intention of misrepresenting the NAACP and Ms. > > > Sherrod or not? Simple question. Have the cojones to answer it. > > > > He made a business decision. > > So you *don't* have the cojones. Correct - he doesn't.
From: William Clark on 1 Aug 2010 11:14 In article <MPG.26bf2fc2b4d462cb98a173(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <4c54ee80$0$4970$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > > > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:40:52 -0400, BAR wrote: > > > In article <wclark2-513B7C.17363431072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > >> In article <MPG.26be2a79e87bedb698a163(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR > > >> <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > >>> In article <wclark2-479852.12420731072010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > >>> state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > >>> > > >>>> So is Breitbart a deliberate liar or not? Simple moral question - > > >>>> yes or no will do. > > >>> > > >>> Breitbart is a publisher and he made a business decision just like > > >>> the NYT, WaPo and other media outlets. > > >>> > > >>> Judgement on Breitbart's using your moral question is irrelevant. > > >>> > > >>> Remember, government censor, businesses make decisions. > > >> > > >> So did he lie with the intention of misrepresenting the NAACP and Ms. > > >> Sherrod or not? Simple question. Have the cojones to answer it. > > > > > > He made a business decision. > > > > ...to tell a lie. > > Sherrod's own words are not a lie. Nor are yours: "Sherrod's own words are a lie" See - easy isn't it?
From: William Clark on 1 Aug 2010 11:17
In article <MPG.26be9c9cd52124da98a16c(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <38u856tig9v3mdq3orii3kae1vl4b74sgj(a)4ax.com>, donsno2 > @charter.net says... > > > > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:39:17 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > >You are a fool if you think that the Sec of Ag went off on his own and > > >fired a black woman for speaking at an NAACP event without consulting > > >the White House and the DOJ first. Vislack didn't appoint Sherrod and he > > >sure as hell wasn't going to fire her without getting permission. > > > > It wasn't even about *speaking* at an NAACP event--it was about > > accepting Breitbart's cherry-picked snippet as believable evidence > > that Sherrod was racist. Almost nobody did due diligence on the > > episode, but Breitbart didn't even intend to. > > Why was Sherrod pushed out of Ag? > > It was a knee jerk reaction by the Obama administration with the > knowledge of Obama and the DOJ. Political appointees serve at the > pleasure of the president due to the fact that they are appointed by the > president. Obama doesn't need to perform due dillegence on Sherrod. He > can just say her services are no longer needed and it would be better if > her resume didn't say she was fired. No, by the Dept. of Ag. If you disagree, please cite the source for "the knowledge of Obama and the DOJ", or else withdraw. Another cheap attempt to smear from a moral pygmy who defends Breitbart. > > The DOJ just confirmed that political or patronage position like US > attornies can be fired at any time for any reason. Sherrod was a > political problem for Obama and the Democrats More typical BS. |