I never said the videos on BigGovernemnt were news. I haven't even looked at the videos on BigGovernment (cause, ya know, I like to get my news from real news agencies like CNN, AP and yes, sometimes even Fox).
The videos you claim exist in BigGovernment do not sound like what I saw. Sounds to me like the guy who runs BigGovernment put together a little montage and decided that it needed some narration. It then goes from 'news' to 'op/ed' in my mind. However, I will stand by the fact that the original videos ARE news, regardless of whether or not its only Fox who is reporting it. On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > > But wait. You said these videos *were* news. I am so confused ;) Are they > not-news on BigGovernment but news on Fox? Are they the same videos? Do you > know? Have you even watched more than "snippets"? > > If you have a link to "actual" video then post it. With a summary. I want to > know that you didn't start all this on the say-so of a few loudmouth > bloggers who you now say do not report the news. > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> 1. A blog does not really constitute news. Unless, of course, its a >> liberal blog, then, apparently, it is Gospel. >> >> 2rt . You are not referring to the _actual_ videos, rather ones that were >> produced with commentary/voiceovers. The snippets of videos I have >> seen had no voiceovers. >> >> 3. Jon Stewart asks why no one else reported on this as well. >> http://snurl.com/rwwoy (Just because it is on Fox does not mean it is >> not news). >> >> 4. Of course you think its a waste if time, it sheds a poor light on >> your beloved ACORN. >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > OK. I'll bite and ask the question. Why would I not look at the stuff on >> a >> > conservative blog? That is where the idiotic stuff in question *is* >> > according to the authority on idiotic stuff, Fox News. If the full videos >> > are posted somewhere, fine. Go watch them as you don't seem to have done >> so. >> > I say it's a waste of time. Why would they edit the dirt *out*? >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> I cannot tell you how funny I find it that you are trying to defend >> >> your position about the videos being edited by what you found on a >> >> conservative blog. >> >> >> >> Those are not the videos we are talking about. We are talking about >> >> the _real_ ones. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > of course they are edited; compare the transcripts to the videos. Look >> at >> >> > the videos! Where did the voiceover and editorial text come from? >> >> > >> >> > Possibly they are not doctored, but I did not see a story when I was >> >> looking >> >> > around last night that ACORN had said so. However, since you started >> >> saying >> >> > that I have been workng from the assumption that this is true, though >> I >> >> > personally am not convinced yet. >> >> > >> >> > Have *you* looked at these videos at all? In Washington she says she's >> >> > trying to get these girls away from an abusive pimp. In Brooklyn she >> >> talks >> >> > about other working girls but does not say they are underage. The one >> in >> >> San >> >> > Bernardino is already discredited so I did not bother with that. If >> there >> >> is >> >> > a fifth video it was not up on the BigGovernment side yesterday >> evening. >> >> > >> >> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Bruce Sorge <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Have you seen all five videos yet? The ones that ACORN have admitted >> are >> >> >> NOT edited? There is more to them than just which tax table to use. >> >> >> >> >> >> Dana wrote: >> >> >> > haven't found a code of ethics yet, but, an incidental find -- if >> you >> >> >> start >> >> >> > from ok this person has income she has to report and she is not an >> >> >> employee, >> >> >> > yet she performs services for her income, then she *is* a business. >> >> Look >> >> >> at >> >> >> > http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040sc.pdf . They are making a big >> >> deal >> >> >> out >> >> >> > of the tax preparer trying to determine which code from the table >> >> >> starting >> >> >> > on C-9 they should use. I mean, Sam, Bruce, which one would *you* >> use? >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:304372 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
