And we're off! Protestors already being arrested in NYC

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-08-29 12:31pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:Talon, I've provided the proof. Any comment?

Well considering I wasn't signed on at the time, kind of hard to reply.

I see you've taken your information from the ever so "unbiased" paper New York Times. I'm sorry, but can anybody really be that thick as to say something like that? It sounds almost comical. But, I'll concede the point because you do have "proof" I suppose. I think you'd agree though, that just sounds a bit ridiculous for any campaign to say.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-08-29 12:39pm

Talon Karrde wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:Talon, I've provided the proof. Any comment?
Well considering I wasn't signed on at the time, kind of hard to reply.

My, someone certainly takes offense easily.

I see you've taken your information from the ever so "unbiased" paper New York Times.

Because, of course, you never quote biased sources either, right?

I'm sorry, but can anybody really be that thick as to say something like that?

You really set yourself up with that comment, but I'm not taking the bait.

It sounds almost comical.

Not even going to bother to point out the irony.

But, I'll concede the point because you do have "proof" I suppose.

Because the source is more liberal, it's only "proof"? Talk about biases.

I think you'd agree though, that just sounds a bit ridiculous for any campaign to say.

I stopped being suprised by the audacity of the Bushites a long time ago.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-08-29 12:48pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:
My, someone certainly takes offense easily.

On the contrary. Only pointing out a simple fact.

Because, of course, you never quote biased sources either, right?

Your right, I have, and have been called on it and immediately my information is then disregarded.

You really set yourself up with that comment, but I'm not taking the bait.

I suppose I should thank you.

Not even going to bother to point out the irony.

I'd still like you to address that small point if you could, just for the simple fact I really don't think a political campaign would be dumb enough to say something like that.

Because the source is more liberal, it's only "proof"? Talk about biases.

I suppose if I quoted a fact to back me up from FOX News you wouldn't be moaning?

I stopped being suprised by the audacity of the Bushites a long time ago.

Yes, we are all well aware of that.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-08-29 12:51pm

Talon Karrde wrote:
Because the source is more liberal, it's only "proof"? Talk about biases.
I suppose if I quoted a fact to back me up from FOX News you wouldn't be moaning?

Regardless of biases, The New York Times is much more reputable than FOX News.

Marksist · Post by **Marksist** » 2004-08-29 12:57pm

Oh come on Talon, NYT isn't that biased. Yes, they are left-leaning, but most definetely not some loony, raving liberal rag as you seem to think they are. And Faux News is more "to the right" than NYT is to the left in my opinion.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-08-29 01:00pm

In reply to both of you, I'm really not so sure. I'm not going to stand up and yell, "Prove it!" because I believe thats impossible to do. It would seem to me the NY Times laces it's stories with subtle, almost subconcious (for those without a political leaning) liberal beliefs. I would assume that you believe FOX News does the same things. Perhaps there's more you believe? Can you try to explain it to me? I can understand if you can't, because it's often hard to place a thumb on something like this, but if you can, Im just kind of curious.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2004-08-29 01:11pm

Sue them for false quoting then, or accept the quote, idiot.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-08-29 01:13pm

Your conspiracy theories do nothing to change the fact that the NYT is held as a reputable source, unlike FOX News.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-08-29 01:16pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:Your conspiracy theories do nothing to change the fact that the NYT is held as a reputable source, unlike FOX News.

But you've yet to show me why FOX News is unreputable

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2004-08-29 01:18pm

Talon Karrde wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:Your conspiracy theories do nothing to change the fact that the NYT is held as a reputable source, unlike FOX News.
But you've yet to show me why FOX News is unreputable

This is a red herring and anyway, even if Fox News was reputable (ha!) it really has no relevence to this thread, and anyway, 2 wrongs don't make a right, so if you're going to disregard that quote, you're gonna have to justify yourself.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-08-29 01:24pm

Rye wrote:
Talon Karrde wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:Your conspiracy theories do nothing to change the fact that the NYT is held as a reputable source, unlike FOX News.
But you've yet to show me why FOX News is unreputable
This is a red herring and anyway, even if Fox News was reputable (ha!) it really has no relevence to this thread, and anyway, 2 wrongs don't make a right, so if you're going to disregard that quote, you're gonna have to justify yourself.

Why don't you go ahead and stay out of the debate until you read the whole thing. Read the entire conversation and you will see that both of these are part of the debate. Until you read the entire context, please abstain from debating.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2004-08-29 01:38pm

It is indeed a red hering, and there are several of examples of why FOX News is not a very reputable source at all here on the board alone. I'm sure you've seen them.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-29 01:40pm

Rye wrote:
Talon Karrde wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:Your conspiracy theories do nothing to change the fact that the NYT is held as a reputable source, unlike FOX News.
But you've yet to show me why FOX News is unreputable
This is a red herring and anyway, even if Fox News was reputable (ha!) it really has no relevence to this thread, and anyway, 2 wrongs don't make a right, so if you're going to disregard that quote, you're gonna have to justify yourself.

Actually I'd like to know as well, examples and such, they would certainly come in use.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-08-29 01:45pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:It is indeed a red hering, and there are several of examples of why FOX News is not a very reputable source at all here on the board alone. I'm sure you've seen them.

Excuse me, but when you make a quote such as this, "Your conspiracy theories do nothing to change the fact that the NYT is held as a reputable source, unlike FOX News." you bring FOX News into the reputability debate. You think you can throw them out there, and then when someone challenges your belief about them, you can just ignore it and claim it's Red Herring. That's not how it works.

And no, all I've really seen is "Faux News is a right-wing whore-house," and other comments like this, nothing material that proves such an attack.