Disappearing Ink

The Outfoxed gals get it wrong again. Once more they attempt to bury their embarrassments--and fail.

When Fox haters get caught in a lie, what do they do? Apologize? Issue a retraction? Correct the record? Try "none of the above". Instead they stonewall, obfuscate, and compound the felony with more lies. But there is another technique that is increasingly popular among the most rabid haters, i.e. the newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed mafia).

First they print some sort of outrageous anti-Fox fiction, banking on the gullibility of the kennel-dwellers to unquestioningly swallow such drivel. But then the unexpected happens: somebody recognizes their lies for what they are. Even worse, the whistle-blower goes to their comment section, jumps through multiple hoops to get around all the blocks put up to keep critical posters from being heard, and then reveals the truth, right on their own page. Catastrophe! The comment gets erased, toot sweet, but sometimes that isn't enough. So the anti-Fox terriers take the ultimate step and remove the entire article from their site. Lies, once exposed, are now effectively buried. And no need to bother with those embarrassing corrections, retractions, and apologies.

This is nothing new for the newspoodles. They were pulling this stunt as far back as October 2004. But lately it's been just one humiliation after another. We've already documented how they tried to hide their cringeworthy personal attack on that "pimp", Judge Andrew Napolitano. They did the same thing when they posted an article brimming with ignorance about judicial immunity. After just one comment pointing out their cluelessness, the entire page vanished. And both of those disappearing acts were pulled off just within the past few weeks!

Now they've done it again. The newsmutt's prima donna of prevarication, nancy, shouts:
Hume & The Reactionary Noise Machine Get It Wrong Again

We love it when the newspups shout about somebody else getting something wrong, in big, bold type.
The "source" for Cumming's alleged contributions of $1,250 to the Kerry campaign was, as far as I've been able to determine, a comment posted on a blog, JustOneMinute. The commenter says that his source was an "FEC spy:"

No, that's not what he says his source was. The commenter says his source was "FEC Spy", a link that sits right on that very page and takes you to the official FEC website. We love the careful research that nancy puts into her "reports".
This was picked up & re-published on Jan 20 by Captain's Quarters... Of course, Captain's Quarters gets it wrong: it wasn't "reported by Tom Maguire;" it was a comment posted on Maguire's blog (& I hope we can all agree that *comments* posted on blogs are not reliable sources of information, unless independently verified)..

It wasn't reported by Tom Maguire? What does the page say?
...Mr. Cumming donated $1,250 to the Kerry campaign in 2004. Not that there is anything wrong with that!  But how did the Times miss it?...Posted by Tom Maguire
Yes, it's that patented nancy "research" again. We hope we can all agree that articles posted by the newspooches are not reliable sources of information, unless independtly verified. But nancy has one more marked card to play as she moves in for the coup de grace:
The data at opensecrets shows only 3 contributions totalling [sic] $1,000. ...Don't you wish the reactionary noise machine would at least get its lies straight?

Unfortunately for nancy, the first poster to comment on her great scoop had some rather bad news for the Fox-haters:
  • Instead of going to third party sites, perhaps you should conduct the search at the FEC's own site. Why don't you try searching for Alfred Cumming at the FEC itself, then report back what the results are? Then you can tell us if Hume got it wrong, or if you did. I won't be holding my breath for your report.

Uh-oh. Trouble in the kennel. When you search at the FEC, the total contribution amount comes to $1,250, precisely as Hume reported. Say, nancy, could it be that Brit Hume's source was not a blog, but rather the FEC itself? Ya think?

The newsmutts quickly retaliated with their first line of defense: censorship. That comment was deleted within minutes. But their cretinous original posting was still there, ready for the next fact-checker to demolish with a click of the mouse. So once again, the newsliars adopted the ultimate solution, and the entire article was quickly removed from the newshound website. You can poke around all day but you won't find it.

However, the curs are as technologically inept as they are dishonest. Just as in all the previous examples, you can still read the article if you know the secret URL. There it is in all its embarrassing glory...minus, of course, the comment they deleted that exposed their duplicity to the world. That revelation of Fox-hater desperation is lost to history. Or rather, it would have been lost, had we not saved it:

Screenshots: they reveal the truth even when the Fox-haters write in disappearing ink.

posted: Sat - January 28, 2006 at 01:48 PM       j$p  send