Is this for real?

[rigney]

I've always been troubled by a renegade or traitor from any camp coming into my tent. Is this young lady a "Manchurian Candidate"?

http://www.bloviatingzeppelin.net/archives/2985

Edited July 26, 2012 by rigney

[rigney]

I've always been troubled by a renegade or traitor from any camp coming into my tent. Is this young lady a "Manchurian Candidate" or are we finally beginning to see and hear some truth? Must have taken a lot of courage or a lot of right wing money? Which?

http://www.bloviatingzeppelin.net/archives/2985

Wow! This really must have hit some raw nerves? No feedback? Edited July 27, 2012 by rigney

[CaptainPanic]

The text of that website is so retarded that just don't feel like responding. Sorry rigney, you trigger some good discussions with your posts, but this one just isn't it.

[rigney]

The text of that website is so retarded that just don't feel like responding. Sorry rigney, you trigger some good discussions with your posts, but this one just isn't it.

There is so damned much hype going on it's hard to believe anything. But is this woman a traitor or is she a conservative pawn? Such a statement coming from a black lady and not being true would make her a total loony, wouldn't you think?. Edited July 27, 2012 by rigney

[CaptainPanic]

There is so damned much hype going on it's hard to believe anything. So, is she a traitor or a conservative pawn? Such a statement coming from a black lady and it not being true would make her a total loony.

Yep. Loony is the word, if you ask me.

 

That text isn't much better than the worst crackpots we get on our lovely forum. Most will eventually get banned for using too many fallcies, or for trolling. If that text would appear on this forum, I would report it for breaking the forum rules.

[rigney]

Yep. Loony is the word, if you ask me.

 

That text isn't much better than the worst crackpots we get on our lovely forum. Most will eventually get banned for using too many fallcies, or for trolling. If that text would appear on this forum, I would report it for breaking the forum rules.

I went back and listened to the videos again. The lady seems very articulate and to be straight forward. If she is lying, she hides it a hell of a lot better than old Tricky Dick Nixon ever could. I suppose my main concern is, if these statements were made a couple of years ago and videoed last year, how come they are only now being released? And if they are lies, why isn't she in jail or at least charged with libel and slander? Edited July 27, 2012 by rigney

[CharonY]

Well, the website is quite full of drivel, but it appears that the lady has been around for quite a while (at least since 2008/9). No doubt that the current election will be used to boost interest. I will have to try to dig some older articles to figure out details, since the newest articles appear to be from partisan websites with reports that are written more like opinion pieces.

 

There is something on wiki, however, under the entry for O'Reilly:

 

In May 2009, O'Reilly severely criticized the paper as "corrupt" for dropping a story about a possible violation of campaign laws by ACORN and the Obama campaign. O'Reilly claimed that sworn testimony before Congress by a former ACORN employee, Anita Moncrief corroborated the story. O'Reilly stated:

Strong evidence suggests the paper killed a story linking ACORN to some Obama people. Instead they ran a general piece stating ACORN has a left-wing bias, knowing that story would be largely ignored while the Obama connection would not be.

^[103]

 

In response, the New York Times ombudsman, Clark Hoyt stated it "was a normal and reasonable editorial decision" not to run the article. He said the Times had run four other stories on ACORN. The story in question had remained unpublished because Anita Moncrief had not provided independently verifiable proof. In addition, The Times ombudsman stated that Moncrief had not given sworn testimony to Congress as claimed by O'Reilly, and that she had credibility problems, having been fired from Acorn for employee theft.^[104]

 

 

And apparently she only started whistleblowing after getting fired. Since a (very) quick search revealed no mainstream media articles (even on Fox, if we disregard the opinion shows) I am somewhat skeptical for now.

[rigney]

Well, the website is quite full of drivel, but it appears that the lady has been around for quite a while (at least since 2008/9). No doubt that the current election will be used to boost interest. I will have to try to dig some older articles to figure out details, since the newest articles appear to be from partisan websites with reports that are written more like opinion pieces.

 

There is something on wiki, however, under the entry for O'Reilly:

 

And apparently she only started whistleblowing after getting fired. Since a (very) quick search revealed no mainstream media articles (even on Fox, if we disregard the opinion shows) I am somewhat skeptical for now.

Skeptical, yes. And I appreciate your input since I'm not familiar with that particular website at all. And O'Reilly, I'd rather hear a hog fart or a duck sing. Don't get me wrong, I'm a right leaning conservative and a (broke Idiot)to boot I suppose. I just don't like over sophistication regardless from where it comes. But I do like Hannity! This gal must have lots of moxy, knowing the black panthers and other liberal groups hate conservatives as the do. Fired or not, this broad has gonads of the nth dimension. Edited July 27, 2012 by rigney

[CharonY]

Well I cannot say that I share your enthusiasm of Hannity, considering his ehm "liberal" relationship with facts.

[rigney]

Yep. Loony is the word, if you ask me.

 

That text isn't much better than the worst crackpots we get on our lovely forum. Most will eventually get banned for using too many fallcies, or for trolling. If that text would appear on this forum, I would report it for breaking the forum rules.

Our lovely forum? Well, it's here! Please report it as ficticious lies or untruths if you will. But no one has made allegations or assumptions, other than to believe it or not. Edited July 29, 2012 by rigney

[JohnB]

Rigney, you need to understand the rules;

 

1. All Conservatives are racist and sexist. Progressives are not, simply by definition.

2. All conservative commentators are liars, from Fox news on down. All "Liberal" commentators are founts of wisdom and even handed truth.

3. Conservatives are dumb and can only repeat what Fox news says. This is deemed true by liberals even if the conservative doesn't watch Fox or Fox is not available in the conservatives nation.

4. If a conservative thinks a liberal commentator should "Shut up" it's because conservatives do not believe in free speech and desire some sort of Jackboot authority. (I've never actually found a conservative pundit suggesting a liberal one be silenced, but the liberals say that it is happening and since they would never lie it must be so.)

5. If a liberal wants a conservative pundit silenced it's because said pundit is spreading "hate speech", "misinformation" or "lies" or something. This is not an intrusion on free speech because preventing "lies" doesn't count as challenging "free speech". Free speech only applies to the truth and the truth only comes from one side.

6. When a rag tag bunch of conservatives have a demonstration with hand painted signs they are obviously an "Astroturf" group. When a highly polished group of Liberals come in a fleet of busses with professionally printed signs, their own newspapers and some of them have jobs in the Liberal campaign office, this is a "Grassroots" organisation.

 

Just like the "Laws of Physics" and the Universe, politics is so much easier to understand once you get the basic "Laws".

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

With election time upon us all, it is apparently pertinent that we remind everyone of a few of our forum rules.

Be civil.

• No flaming. Refrain from insulting or attacking users in a discussion.
• Avoid the use of vulgar language.
• Slurs or prejudice against any group of people (or person) are prohibited.
• Please refer to SFN's etiquette guide before posting.

!

Moderator Note

Discussing politics does not mean you need to insult the people or groups of people you happen to disagree with. SFN is not and will not be a camping ground for people to start, continue or in any way be part of anything even close to resembling a smear campaign against politicians or their respective parties. This includes bad mouthing just as it includes citing false allegations and flat out lies as the truth. That sort of behavior is not conducive to discussion, which as it turns out is something we aim to foster, and it will certainly not be tolerated here. This goes for everybody.

Now please, get back on topic.

[rigney]

Rigney, you need to understand the rules;

 

1. All Conservatives are racist and sexist. Progressives are not, simply by definition.

2. All conservative commentators are liars, from Fox news on down. All "Liberal" commentators are founts of wisdom and even handed truth.

3. Conservatives are dumb and can only repeat what Fox news says. This is deemed true by liberals even if the conservative doesn't watch Fox or Fox is not available in the conservatives nation.

4. If a conservative thinks a liberal commentator should "Shut up" it's because conservatives do not believe in free speech and desire some sort of Jackboot authority. (I've never actually found a conservative pundit suggesting a liberal one be silenced, but the liberals say that it is happening and since they would never lie it must be so.)

5. If a liberal wants a conservative pundit silenced it's because said pundit is spreading "hate speech", "misinformation" or "lies" or something. This is not an intrusion on free speech because preventing "lies" doesn't count as challenging "free speech". Free speech only applies to the truth and the truth only comes from one side.

6. When a rag tag bunch of conservatives have a demonstration with hand painted signs they are obviously an "Astroturf" group. When a highly polished group of Liberals come in a fleet of busses with professionally printed signs, their own newspapers and some of them have jobs in the Liberal campaign office, this is a "Grassroots" organisation.

 

Just like the "Laws of Physics" and the Universe, politics is so much easier to understand once you get the basic "Laws".

Thanks JohnB. Both gratifing and stimulating to get things straightened out again. On most occasions when I become a little unhinged and antidiplomatic, I lock myself in an upstairs bedroom closet, pop a few capsules of Ritalin and in a day or two my panic attack is over. Being very cautious, I am able to come down stairs again to resume my life and watch MSNBC. I can’t get FOX on my rabbit ears. I wonder if that might be a political ploy of sorts? But then, I do live a fur piece up the holler.Thanks again for the hints. Now if astrophysics could be explained so easily. Edited July 30, 2012 by rigney

[rigney]

The text of that website is so retarded that just don't feel like responding. Sorry rigney, you trigger some good discussions with your posts, but this one just isn't it.

Wish you hadn't responded by using "retarded" to describe that web site. Dysfunctional may have been a better choice. Some here on the forum may have a less fortunate child. I hate lumping those children in with a bunch of right wing nuts.

 

The text of that website is so retarded that just don't feel like responding. Sorry rigney, you trigger some good discussions with your posts, but this one just isn't it.

Just sorry you used "retarded" to describe that web site insted of dysfunctional. Some here on the forum may have less than fortunate children and I really wouldn't like lumping them in with a bunch of nuts from either side. Edited July 30, 2012 by rigney

[iNow]

Just sorry you used "retarded" to describe that web site insted of dysfunctional.

I agree with you here, rigney. We really need to get ourselves away from using the term retarded as invective.

 

[Moontanman]

Just for rigney, no other reason...

 

 

sorry i gave the wrong link...

 

of you look at this in the right time index this is almost prophetic...

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkTmuLHFsKE

 

No this is the one I meant to post... no excuse

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEPxc3RW4js

 

The thing must cycle

or something...

Edited July 31, 2012 by Moontanman

[JohnB]

Love that last one. I think it applies to more than just Detroit.

[rigney]

I'm nuts for wacky stuff Moon. Almost good as politics. Gonna take that Elephant Parts thing and put in my files.

[rigney]

I agree with you here, rigney. We really need to get ourselves away from using the term retarded as invective.

 

I knew such feelings were out there, just didnt know where to look. Thanks for the post. Edited July 31, 2012 by rigney

[Moontanman]

I'm nuts for wacky stuff Moon. Almost good as politics. Gonna take that Elephant Parts thing and put in my files.

 

 

I have the entire thing on Laser Disc, I love the pirate alphabet, eeeeeyyyyyyeeee

 

"My god it's a 50's fit! 50cc of rum and coke stat"....

Edited July 31, 2012 by Moontanman

[JohnB]

"My god it's a 50's fit! 50cc of rum and coke stat"....

 

50cc??? Mate, we need to have serious talk about drinkin', or maybe just have some serious drinkin'.

 

And always remember "When life smothers you in molasses, make Rum."

[rigney]

I have the entire thing on Laser Disc, I love the pirate alphabet, eeeeeyyyyyyeeee

 

"My god it's a 50's fit! 50cc of rum and coke stat"....

Never touch the stuff. If it ain't got "Shine" writ on it somewhere or smells lak shine, i don't trust it. Tried it in Mexico once with a pretty seneoritte footing the bill and danged near strangled. Uh-Uh! No more of that stuff. Edited August 1, 2012 by rigney

[JohnB]

We'll get you out with the bear for a while.

 

[rigney]

We'll get you out with the bear for a while.

 

So that's what is known as a kawaller bear? Americans are so damn dumn. I thought it was a polar thing. Was it actually patting its paw or was that its last gesture? Edited August 1, 2012 by rigney

[Arete]

We'll get you out with the bear for a while.

 

Do you drive one of those utes with the mudflaps and aerials, and frequent B&S balls perchance?

Edited August 1, 2012 by Arete