Latest Newshound Drivel: An Illiterate Torrent of Lies


The Outfoxed gals are caught in more lies. What's worse, they look like idiots in the process. With J$P Video!

Sometimes they just make it too easy. The Fox haters, that is, particularly the newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed mob). The latest embarrassment comes courtesy of deceitful Donna, who headlines her latest gem with this incomprehensible assertion:
Who's The Victom [sic] In Hillary's Break In [sic]? Why, On Fox It's Hilary [sic] Of Course

Does anyone know what that's supposed to mean? On Fox, Hilary [sic] is the Victom [sic]? And on CNN, the Victom [sic] is who, Ron Paul? Dennis Kucinich? Donna goes on to complain about IEisenberger [sic]... wait, you might as well see it for yourself, inept spelling, illiterate grammar, and all:



There's writing that would embarrass the average kindergardner. And yet, buried in all that backward blather, are a couple of card-carrying, honest-to-goodness Hound Lies:
Did Fox talk about how frightning an experience this was to Hillary Clinton or her volutneer campaign workers? No
The truth? That's exactly what they were talking about. Lie #1. But why stop at one lie when two are twice as good?
Hill kept saying this poor, poor man.
The truth? E.D. Hill didn't keep saying "this poor, poor man". She never said it even once! Where did Donna get the idea that she did? She made it up! Hound Lie #2.

See for yourself what Fox was talking about at precisely the top of the 2:00 pm hour, the very time deceptive Donna claims nobody talked about the frightning [sic] experience of the volutneer [sic] campaign workers. And here also is the reporting of E.D. Hill, whom Donna insists "kept saying" "this poor poor man":




Tell the newspoodles what you think of their latest lying smear.

posted: Mon - December 3, 2007 at 07:37 PM       j$p  send 

Fox Fan
You actually missed several grammar errors in that post, most attributed to punctuation.
 
Elementary grammar/basic spelling aside, the misinformation supplied by the article was expected.
December 3, 2007, 10:54:44 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well if I marked all of them there would be so many red circles that it would obscure most of the text!  What I should have done was run it without the mark ups, and then offer a prize to the person who could identify all the spelling errors, grammatical goofs, and puncutation mistakes.
 
Oh, and of course, the content of the article was patently false and built on multiple lies. But then, that's what we expect from the newsmutts.
December 4, 2007, 12:58:41 AM EST – Like – Reply


steve
Donna's my favorite, she writes at about a 3rd grade level, and she's never quite figured out the spell check. However I don't think I've ever seen a post as funny as this one, the headline kills me. 
 
My favorite part is when Donna takes the conservative argument about healthcare... he could afford it if he didn't spend his money on booze. I'm sure in Donna's head that only applies to people who attack democrats, no one else could afford it either way.
December 4, 2007, 10:38:36 AM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
Appear's we are also in a time warp since the date of the post is December, 13, 2007. HMMM, does the Donna have something planned for that date? Maybe a trip to rehab or her first appearance on Oralmann as a shining example of what the Teacher's Union's will do for the educational system under a DemonNUTT led country.
December 4, 2007, 5:20:06 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Please, PLEASE look up proper usage of the apostrophe. Nice call on the date though, I didn't notice it...
December 4, 2007, 6:49:21 PM EST – Like – Reply


Guest
lol, i didn't notice the date, she must have fixed it when she fixed the headline cause it says dec 3 now
December 4, 2007, 7:22:31 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Isn't that something? They fix the wrong date. They change one of several dozen spelling/grammar mistakes. But their outright lies about what Fox broadcast remain standing!
December 4, 2007, 7:25:02 PM EST – Like – Reply


Newshound
I'm curious Johnny, I noticed you criticizing our website. Why don't you respond to the post BELOW that one? The one about Cavuto's lopsidedly Republican guest list and his biased programming for the previous week? Or are you unable to provide documentation proving that Cavuto supposedly had more Democrats on than Newshounds writers claimed? Or that the biased little questions headlining each segment weren't exactly what Newshounds claimed?
 
Any takers? Doubt it. Judging by the history of this site you seem to occasionally cherrypick an argument to debate, but otherwise steer away from arguments concerning the number imbalance between Republicans and Democrats on Fox News, or the biased questions the hosts use.
 
Here, for example, is E.D. Hill, a news anchor, not a political pundit, attacking Hillary Clinton as a "learjet liberal", and making the ridiculous argument that Clinton "overtipped" by giving some waitress 100 bucks (apparently being too generous is also a bad thing for the Country Club Republicans at Fox News). http://mediamatters.org/items/200711100003
Or another segment in which Cavuto brings on only one Republican guest to attack Clinton and doesn't even note that she's from a conservative group http://mediamatters.org/items/200702060009
 
Care to respond to this?
 
Or are you only able to attack things like grammar and punctuation?
 
So impressive, you and your 5 readers.
December 4, 2007, 7:31:09 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
Please, PLEASE look up proper usage of the apostrophe. Nice call on the date though, I didn't notice it... 
Fox Fan | 12.04.07 - 6:54 pm | # 
 
FF, now you are a English teacher? Be careful making such pointless observation's of one minor slip. By the way, I will now evalute all your spelling and grammar. You do use the APA standards for writing I hope.
December 4, 2007, 7:54:14 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
lol, i didn't notice the date, she must have fixed it when she fixed the headline cause it says dec 3 now
Anonymous | 12.04.07 - 7:27 pm | # 
 
After I posted with an incorrect apostrophe slip, ahh the ever observant FF, I went back and noticed the date was changed but the headline and rest of the post was still in the grammical language of a drunken tail chasing mutt. Any errors, FF? Mutt's get old but never age past a 2 year old in mentality. Thus, the name of the site I presume.
December 4, 2007, 8:02:16 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
"So impressive, you and your 5 readers."
 
I would rather read a site that factually (with video!) and intelligently breaks down another site's lies with 5 other viewers than read the site that lies with 50 other viewers.
 
Just my take, Newshound.
 
Why don't you comment on the article at hand and its proven lies? It's a lot faster and more direct than asking someone else to compose articles at your demand. Show us where johnny is wrong, hater.
 
Scott, no offense on the apostrophe comment.
December 4, 2007, 8:09:58 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
So impressive, you and your 5 readers.
Newshound | 12.04.07 - 7:36 pm | # 
 
So impressive you list no name. Now why would that be? You list a radical left-wing site, that feeds Keithy the Oralmann his daily lines. Now little tail chaser, J$ can defend himself and his site but I'll take a site with 5 reader's over a site that has 20 basement dweller's posting under dozens of names and have the grasp of the English language that a nat has. Prove you really aren't as stupid as the mutt site and actually come to the board with something other than a Clinton founded site as your reference. Now, HEEEERRRRRREEEE'S Johnny$!
December 4, 2007, 8:14:19 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
None taken, NOW, LOL. Great minds think alike with the response to that tail chaser.
December 4, 2007, 8:17:17 PM EST – Like – Reply


steve
yeah johnny, geeze why don't you spend more time writing articles about what the newshounds want you to write about and less time exposing their lies in posts they don't want you to write about?
December 4, 2007, 8:25:39 PM EST – Like – Reply


steve
oh, and also johnny, apparently all you do is expose spelling and grammar errors, which is true if you ignore the second half of the post... and the video.. and the countless other posts you've made about the newshounds lies.
December 4, 2007, 8:29:53 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
Finally an undercover tailchaser is posting. Look at the J$ post prior to this one. Guess Donna and her mutts must have been given orders by GreenBalls and/or Georgie "War Profiteer Halliburton Stock Holder" Soros to respond.
December 4, 2007, 8:30:22 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
Ahh, our little mutt is posting to back post's like a rabid little Keithy. Have to check Oralmanns commerical breaks to see if his drunken honey Ellen and Mutts have him responding under the Mutt name. Or maybe Keithy's a Bill Cochran kind of Mutt.
December 4, 2007, 8:36:58 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> I noticed you criticizing our website
 
"Your" website? How do I know that? I don't see the name of any of the newshound writers at the bottom of your post. Could you possibly be Billy Corcoran, whose lies we have exposed repeatedly? Or are you one of the other fabulists?
 
> Why don't you respond to the post BELOW that one?
 
I'll tell you what, why don't you respond to THIS post. That's usually the way it works with comment threads. Instead of trying to divert attention by changing the subject, just tell me where I'm wrong. Respond to the Two Big Lies about what "your" site claimed E.D. Hill said "over and over" (when she never even said it once), as well as to what you claimed Fox did NOT talk about, when they clearly and plainly did. You know, like the newshounds have done hundreds of times in the past.
 
I prefer that comments here address the post they are attached to, not some other post on some other blog that's one line below or 15 pixels above another post.
 
Oh, and while you are responding to THIS post, and responding to the video that proves your site lied about Fox again, perhaps you could also give me some advice. When I try to post at "your" blog, I am told I am not welcome and that my comments will be automatically deleted. Now in your opinion, should I apply those rules from "your" blog to your comments on this blog? In your own words, please.
December 4, 2007, 10:27:14 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Oh, and "newshound"? You aren't fooling anyone with your latest name change. Your IP is still coming from that same NJ college as back when you called yourself "Rawkins" or "rawker" or a half-dozen other phony names.
 
Here's a little trip back to memory lane for you:
 
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/johnnydollar/E20070918133739/#238125
 
This is where you lied about ME, and instead of answering to it, you ran off, and thought that by changing your name you wouldn't have to fess up to your own lie. Now your latest alias appears to make the dubious claim that you are part of the newsmutts site. That's something I wouldn't want to admit even if it were true, and I certainly wouldn't want to tar myself with their sleazy reputation if it weren't.
 
So on top of the points in my message just above, that you won't answer, how about addressing your previously posted lie about me and once and for all manning up a bit and admit you didn't tell the truth. I know a "newshound" would be very reluctant to do that, but since it appears you aren't telling the truth about that either, you ought to be willing to admit that your earlier lie about me was just that: a lie.
December 4, 2007, 11:07:32 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
Opps, misspelled Billy's name. Corchran, Corcoran it all = mutts. Billy Corcoran, Amazing how the mutts run when faced with having to answer their propaganda. I still have a feeling Keithy was typing considering all the time stamps on this and the other J$ post's. Guess I have to watch the repeat of SplishSplashIwasTakingABathMann and time his breaks against the post's. Here Ducky Ducky Ducky.
December 4, 2007, 11:43:16 PM EST – Like – Reply


Susan
Johnny $, I don't want to tell you what to do, but I've found when dealing with mutts, keeping it simple is the way to go, 
i.e., Sit...lay...roll over. 
After serious work you may be able to incorporate "admit your mistake," and "apoligize!" 
 
Just a thought....
December 5, 2007, 12:47:06 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
How about "speak"?
 
Looks like "Newshound" lost their voice, the cowering poodle!
December 5, 2007, 9:45:19 PM EST – Like – Reply


Ira
Johnny: It doesn't matter whether it is Tom, snkbt, "On the Mark" or about 20 other names I conveniently forgot, it is always the same. 
 
They always begin attempting to sound thoughtful and respectable but after adding few links to Media Matters and other similar smear sites , they gradually become angry and end their post with vitriol and insults.
 
Happens every time.
December 5, 2007, 10:49:19 PM EST – Like – Reply


Primus
Nice selective editing. I DVRed and you definitely left out a bunch of key comments. Nice try. I like honesty, though I am left wing. You nit picked this one to death and the truth was the casualty. I'll keep referencing what you say and compare it to Newshound. They still went out of their way to take the discussion away from Hilary and it became a question of celebrity. You know Fox bashes Hilary. Watch the prime -time slots and tell me different. I was just looking for truth.
December 6, 2007, 5:38:04 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> you definitely left out a bunch of key comments.
 
I wasn't intending to run a half hour of video--the only parts I ran were the parts that proved that Donna and the newshounds were not telling the truth. (It's not by accident that the newsmutts posted no video at all.)
 
> You nit picked this one to death and the truth was the casualty. 
 
That's some "nitpicking" The newshounds claimed that NOBODY talked about the effect on the campaign volunteers. Oops, incorrect. Several people did.
 
Then they claimed ED Hill kept saying 'this poor poor man'. Pretty neat trick, since she didn't even say it ONCE! Nitpicking, eh?
 
If you are looking for truth, then why are you complaining about MY post? You're right that the truth was a casualty, but not at this site, where we expose the truth and refute the lies. If you want to file a complaint, file it with the newshounds. They're the ones who didn't tell the truth.
December 6, 2007, 5:59:03 PM EST – Like – Reply


Daytona
Hey Johnny and the 5 Foxtards!!
 
Fox is obviously biased for Christ sake. Even you mental giants know that so just admit it. All you have to do is just watch. It's easy.
 
If you don't seek help now.
December 7, 2007, 3:13:26 AM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Thank you for your comprehensive analysis, Daytona.
December 7, 2007, 10:20:06 AM EST – Like – Reply


DjK
Thanks for the clip, J$P!
 
Keep up the good work
December 18, 2007, 2:16:11 AM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
>Hey Johnny and the 5 Foxtards!!
Daytona | 12.07.07 - 3:18 am | # 
 
Why is it that people who claim to be on the side of minorities always seem to delight in rubbing their "enemies" noses in the crap of low numbers?
 
They do this about the war too.. like when they call non-defeatist 33%ers. (a habit that is hard to break for them after the Democrats managed to drag Congress even lower)
January 2, 2008, 3:15:09 AM EST – Like – Reply