dick, How is it my problem if you are so naive as to believe everything anyone tells you? ONCE AGAIN, mistakes are made, people fuck up.
Yes, I'm terribly, terribly sorry Pollyanna, but human nature DOES exist and must be taken into consideration. Oh. BTW, Fox News is most definitely part of the MSM. Next time the ratings come out you'll be bragging about their high ratings, HUGE audience and popularity. What do you think Main Stream Media means? NOT believing "them all" would be just about as stupid as BELIEVING them all. On Sep 11, 8:28 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote: > The MSM is the one that is telling us that we should believe them > because they fact check everything. That is their whole basis for our > belief in them. Now you are saying that I have to take human nature > into consideration. Tell that to Tom Brokaw and Tom Friedman when they > tell you that the MSM can be totally trusted and the bloggers can't. > Strange that the bloggers are the ones who are right and the MSM is the > one that is wrong. Your response? They are human and can make a > mistake. With that in mind how do I then divorce the "mistakes" from > the true stories. I know. Just don't believe them at all. > > You are the one who is being childish. You believe them. I don't until > they prove to me that their story has a basis in some sort of fact. > This one did not ring true at all. How likely is it that the Coast > Guard would run an exercise like that without telling the local > authorities. Then the first step for the newsmen should be check with > the local authorities. Then check with the Coast Guard. They did > neither. Why then should I believe them. > > > > Hollywood wrote: > > Dick, > > > As i said, you rationalize like a child. You completely fail to take > > human nature into consideration. OF COURSE there have been, over the > > years, most likey a number of mistakes and even lies. Let's look at a > > period of let's say 10 years. How many hundreds of thousands of > > stories, how many thousand of reporters and/or spokespersons and > > commentators involved? Are the lies and/or mistakes occuring 1/10 of > > 1% of the time? Is it happening 10% of the time? How many honest > > mistakes are being called "lies", with no logical justification? > > > If you are looking for absolute perfection and feel that if that does > > not exist it MUST then be 100% false, well all I can say is you are > > going to be one bitter, angry and delusion fellow. > > > On Sep 11, 8:11 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > >> If the same group makes the same mistake over and over, then it appears > >> to be a normal behavior for them. I am not rationalizing. You are. I > >> am saying that since they have told lie after lie after lie, then to > >> break that pattern they should be absolutely correct in their > >> verification before they put out the news story. You are sayng that so > >> what if they lied before; this time they might not have so I will just > >> call it a mistake. That is the very definition of a rationalization. > > >> Hollywood wrote: > > >>> dick, > > >>> Did I claim it was their FIRST mistake ever? You rationalize as a > >>> child. > > >>> BTW, making a statement and then not being able to prove it is not > >>> proof that the statement is a lie. > > >>> On Sep 11, 8:01 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > >>>> We ARE talking about CNN here. Remember that they already have admitted > >>>> that during the Saddam era they lied with their reporting. Remember > >>>> also that their news director claimed that he had proof that the > >>>> American military were aiming at the reporters in the MSM and made this > >>>> statement at an international meeting in Switzerland. When he was taxed > >>>> to prove it he admitted that he did not have the proof. Why should I > >>>> not equate their "mistake" with a "lie." That is their MO. > > >>>> Hollywood wrote: > > >>>>> dick, > > >>>>> Did you not take note of my usage of the word "mistake"? It was a > >>>>> MISTAKE to have not checked the story. So what does that have to do > >>>>> with LYING? Are you purposely playing the fool? > > >>>>> On Sep 11, 7:37 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > >>>>>> But I thought the reason we should pay attention to the MSM is because > >>>>>> they fact check everything. Obviously that is not true and also > >>>>>> obviously the bloggers on the internet are doing a much better job of > >>>>>> vetting than the MSM is. In fact Tom Brokaw and Tom Friedman just > >>>>>> spoke > >>>>>> out on that Sunday on the morning news shows as to why you should > >>>>>> believe the MSM rather than the bloggers. Guess they lied. > > >>>>>> Hollywood wrote: > > >>>>>>> dick, > > >>>>>>> So? It's called a mistake. A lie is when you KNOW something to be > >>>>>>> false or wrong at the time you say it. You might wish to invest in a > >>>>>>> dictionary. > > >>>>>>> On Sep 11, 7:02 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> <http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/> > > >>>>>>>> *September 11, 2009* > >>>>>>>> *Categories:* CNN > >>>>>>>> <http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/index.cfm/category/CNN> > > >>>>>>>> CNN takes heat for Coast Guard report > > >>>>>>>> CNN had some explaining to do on the air Friday morning, following > >>>>>>>> its > >>>>>>>> earlier report that the Coast Guard "tried to prevent a boat from > >>>>>>>> entering a security zone on the Potomac River," and that shots were > >>>>>>>> fired not far from where President Obama commemorated the attacks on > >>>>>>>> Sept. 11. > > >>>>>>>> The network caused a stir on Twitter > >>>>>>>> <http://twitter.com/CNN/status/3911715344> with the following: > >>>>>>>> "BREAKING > >>>>>>>> NEWS: Suspicious boat in river near Obama in DC. Police scanner > >>>>>>>> reports > >>>>>>>> of shots fired. Circumstances unclear." > > >>>>>>>> It turns out the Coast Guard was involved in a training exercise. > > >>>>>>>> Jeanne Meserve, CNN's homeland security correspondent, went on the > >>>>>>>> air > >>>>>>>> after to explain why the network reported on shots being fired. > > >>>>>>>> "We saw things happening on the water," she said. "We could see boats > >>>>>>>> racing around. And we were listening to Coast Guard radio traffic." > > >>>>>>>> Meserve said she heard on the Coast Guard radio that 10 rounds had > >>>>>>>> been > >>>>>>>> fired. > > >>>>>>>> CNN had based its initial story > >>>>>>>> <http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/11/coast-guard-confronts-boat-as...> > >>>>>>>> on reports from police scanners that shots had been fired, but had no > >>>>>>>> independent confirmation. > > >>>>>>>> White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told POLITICO > >>>>>>>> <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27036.html> that CNN > >>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>> attend the Coast Guard's noon press conference where they'll explain > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> exercise on the Potomac. > > >>>>>>>> "My only caution would be that before we report things like this, > >>>>>>>> checking would be good," Gibbs said. > > >>>>>>>> Later, Gibbs and CNN's Elaine Quijano had a heated exchanged during a > >>>>>>>> gaggle with reporters, where the press secretary said it was "a > >>>>>>>> little > >>>>>>>> hard to divorce the media coverage" from her questions. Gibbs said > >>>>>>>> his > >>>>>>>> criticism wasn't of her, "just writ large at CNN." > > >>>>>>>> "Look, if anybody was unnecessarily alarmed based on erroneous > >>>>>>>> reporting > >>>>>>>> that denoted that shots had been fired, I think everybody is > >>>>>>>> apologetic > >>>>>>>> of that," Gibbs said. > > >>>>>>>> CBS News Radio White House correspondent Mark Knoller, on Twitter > >>>>>>>> <http://twitter.com/MARKKNOLLER>, said that "some networks have a > >>>>>>>> lot of > >>>>>>>> explaining to do--misinterpreting police scanner messages as shots > >>>>>>>> firect [sp?] by the coast guard. He added: "As Walter Cronkite used > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> say, get it first, but first, get it right." > > >>>>>>>> Matt Drudge singled out the network, with a blaring headline: "CNN > >>>>>>>> PANIC > >>>>>>>> IN DC ON 911 ANNI." > > >>>>>>>> A CNN spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for > >>>>>>>> comment. > > >>>>>>>> UPDATE: CNN's statement. > >>>>>>>> <http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0909/CNN_unapologetic_...> > > >>>>>>>> *By Michael Calderone 11:31 AM* > >>>>>>>> comments (197) > >>>>>>>> <http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0909/CNN_takes_heat_fo...> > >>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>> post comment <javascript:daysElapsed('q1','2009,9,11','1');> | > >>>>>>>> permalink > >>>>>>>> <http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0909/CNN_takes_heat_fo...>- > >>>>>>>> Hide quoted text - > > >>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
