1/19/10 11:18 AM

Fox Haters In-Depth: Smears, Lies, and Bigotry

Today's edition of Fox Haters Week in Review breaks from our usual format to focus on one egregious example of ignorance, intolerance, and dishonesty. The controversy over Notre Dame and Barack Obama has clearly brought out the worst in newshound Priscilla. Her headline blares:

Fox News Joins Randall Terry Inspired Crusade...
She repeats that in the text, claiming Terry "joined up" with Fox News to "spin a story about a 'controversy'". Prissy presents zero evidence--nothing--that Randall Terry has any involvement or connection whatsoever with FNC's coverage. So why does his name even come up? Because Priscilla tossed him into the mix to engage in the time-honored smear: guilt by association.

Priscilla turns her attention to one of FNC's contributors, Fr Jonathan Morris:
Unlike other, appropriately secular media outlets, Fox even has a resident priest who contributes articles to the Fox website.
Let's pause for a moment to consider that. Before working for Fox, Fr Morris was a commentator on CNN and the BBC. Plus CNN has a contributor on its payroll who is an ordained minister. For years they employed a Reverend who hosted a weekly program! Does this mean CNN is not "appropriately secular"? Priscilla doesn't say.

The treatment of Fr Morris by the newspoodles is also worth noting. Early in his association with Fox, there was little complaint by the mongrels over the fact that he wasn't "secular". In fact, when he took a position they liked, the bassets barked their approval:
Father Morris, who was extremely fired up on the topic, made an amazing point. I doubt we'll be seeing much more of him on Fox.
Yes, their Nostradamus skills were up to their usual standards. So when Fr Morris was consistent and began to articulate Catholic positions the hounds didn't agree with, they quickly turned against him. And that meant it was time to roll out the personal attacks.

It began with the curiously repetitive description of Fr Morris as "baby-faced". Just what was that supposed to mean? Don't you know, this dangerous priest belongs to an "ultra-secret cult", i.e. a religious order (so secret that it advertises itself on a public website!). The mastiffs breathlessly detailed allegations against the man who founded the order in 1941. Yes, in 1941. Before Fr Morris was even born. The newspooches thought they could use this bit of 60-year-old innuendo to smear Fr Morris. In other words, guilt by association redux. Are you starting to understand the "baby-faced" references now? Well, in case you didn't connect the loathsome dots, the kennel dwellers certainly did:
  • First, he's gay; second, he's lived the majority of his life living with nothing but men where women are treated as second class citizens by his chosen religion. and three, he's very insecure about his manhood so he has to belittle women in order to make his penis seem larger. he's the type of gay man that has known he was gay from birth and therefore has had no interest in even understanding women and their role in society....Edited By Siteowner
  • Why is it surprising that FOX would have a pedophile priest as a news contributor?
Back to Priscilla, who sets in to critique a debate between Fr Morris and Phil Donahue. Here is the video of the segment, which we will reference at several points below:


Unsupported, undocumented allegations are a special feature of Prissy's prose:
It’s highly unlikely that you’ll see any commentary presenting a pro-choice argument on Fox News.
Source? Evidence? Not required on Planet Priscilla. But wait, isn't this all about a segment presenting the arguments of pro-choice Phil Donahue? Oh, never mind that!

Prissy attempts to "correct" Martha MacCallum by stating:
Despite polling data that shows the Roman Catholic Church in decline...
Actually, the link she cites focuses on one particular factor: people who change their religious affiliation, something that affects all denominations. If you look a little more carefully at what that website says, they don't confirm the "decline" claimed by Prissy but in fact disprove it:
Unlike Protestants, who have seen their ranks dwindle as a share of the population, the GSS findings suggest that the proportion of the adult population that identifies itself as Catholic has held fairly steady, at around 25%, in recent decades.
This is consistent with the most recent ARIS survey reporting that Catholics have gained 11 million followers since 1990. So our favorite mongrel either didn't bother to read the site she linked to, or deliberately misrepresented what it says.

Priscilla wastes no time in throwing Martha MacCallum under the bus:
The segments that could be considered even handed were laced with commentary that revealed a bias on the part of the interviewer so “fair and balanced?’ – not so much.
Does she cite evidence that MacCallum's questions were biased? Oh sure, but her examples prove to be that old staple of the anti-Fox terriers: doctored quotes!
Martha defended the church’s position: “The Catholic church needs to defend life from moment of conception.” (Hey Martha, how about social justice, immigration, and poverty issues which Obama and the Catholic Church agree on?)
But Priscilla isn't telling the truth. Martha MacCallum didn't say that; Fr Morris said it (listen at -8:10). Taking his words and claiming MacCallum said them is a tried and true tactic to fabricate "bias" that isn't there. Then Prissy gives us another "quote" from MacCallum:
"What if you had an anti-Semitic speaker speak at a Jewish university? It goes against the central core of the most fundamental belief. The central core of Catholicism is a respect for life which isn't backing embryonic stem cell research while negating other areas of research. When you have a central core belief isn’t that wrong?"
Most people use quotation marks to present the verbatim words of a speaker. Priscilla and the newshounds use quotation marks as an invitation to creative writing. Compare that "quote" with MacCallum's actual words (starting at -4:15) and see for yourself. Also note the last sentence: according to Priscilla it ends with "isn't that wrong". Only it doesn't. Priscilla made it up! But hey, that's nothing new. By the way, Priscilla continues to cite this tissue of lies and counterfeit quotes as evidence of MacCallum's "bias"!

Prissy has a few more poisoned arrows in her quiver. She writes of MacCallum:
She asked if this is something the school should do “given all the controversy over stem cell research which many Catholics are against (63% approve of) and the abortion issue.”
First, this is yet another mangled quote, as MacCallum referred (at -9:59) to embryonic stem cell research. But what's the point of Priscilla interjecting the 63% statistic? MacCallum didn't say "most", she said "many", so that statistic shows her to be correct. And why is Prissy bringing up popularity polls regarding a matter of dogma? Is she so ignorant of Catholicism that she thinks it's some sort of a democracy? Does she know the meaning of the term "hierarchical"?

Then in a "comment" largely cribbed from that impartial, down-the-middle source for unbiased news, The American Prospect, Priscilla offers more insinuations unencumbered by any of those pesky things like evidence or documentation:
As noted in Posner's article, and not noted by Fox, “On campus, the editorial board of The Observer, the Notre Dame student newspaper, noted "a clear disconnect between alumni and the student body as a whole on this issue."
Not noted by Fox? That's precisely where we heard it.
If Fox were “fair and balanced,” they would interview faculty and students at the university.
You mean like here? And here?

Priscilla (still channeling American Prospect) tries to paint those who object to Obama's honorary degree as "extremist" groups by claiming that only "some Catholic Bishops" are involved. But she doesn't tell you that the body of US Bishops ruled on this issue five years ago:
The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.
After all of Priscilla's fabrication, dishonesty, and rampant ignorance, her final coup de grace exposes the entire enterprise for what it is. She dismisses practicing Catholics who follow their Church's teachings (and consequently do not agree with her) as "a small, but loud, lunatic fringe". Lunatic fringe!? Do we detect a soupçon of anti-Catholic bigotry there? Could anyone possibly think this is part of a pattern by the biased bassets? Let's see...

Item: Newshounds complain that Laura Ingraham's Catholic religion prevents her from being objective.

Item: Priscilla (surprise!) ignorantly asserts that Bill O'Reilly "is the product of a Catholic education where sex was not discussed unless it was in the context of 'mortal sin'."

item: A video clip of a Catholic church slammed as "non-inclusive imagery".

Item: Tasteless lack of respect for the sacraments: "They also discussed the Catholic sacrament of communion - hands or mouth? (Please, don't go there.)"

Item: Headline accuses the Pope of being part of an "unholy trinity".

Item: The birth of Christ dismissed as just so much "nonsense".

Item: Newshound writer rants about the "depravity, collusion, corruption, toxic secrecy, favoritism, greed, pride and political machinations" of the Catholic Church.

Item: Newshounds repeatedly inject snide references to the Catholic faith of FNC personnel: "good Catholic" Hannity, "good Catholic" Ingraham, "good Catholic boy" O'Reilly. And regarding Cavuto: "Neil Cavuto is Catholic. I wonder if he thinks he's going to get into Heaven." Why do the newshounds single out Catholics in this fashion?

Anti-Christian, anti-Catholic bigots? The newshounds? How could anyone possibly come to that conclusion?

Spot something you'd like to see in the next Fox Haters Week in Review? Send us an email.




Fox Fan
Do you mean to tell us that the Newshounds don't even comprehend the content of video and articles they write about before they smear a majority of Americans out of one side of their doggy mouths and back it up by drooling self-professed bigotry and lies out of the other side? Never!
 
Thank you Priscilla and the repeatedly discredited Newshounds for making this Haters Review possible. Seriously, you guys are the best (or the worst? never know in the doggy dog land of lies=truth...).
April 5, 2009, 3:45:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Haggis
Johnny...reading that you'd think NewsHounds was a terrible place....What a coincidence....FNC come across the same way when reporting on President Obama.
April 5, 2009, 4:02:06 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
At least FNC doesn't have to fabricate entire reports, ignore reality, make up quotes out of thin air, and try to appeal to anti-Christian bigotry among its viewers in order to get their point across like NHs do.
 
It's no comparison Haggis.
April 5, 2009, 4:22:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
Must have been a pretty on-the-mark week at Newshounds if you had to expend so much energy taking apart one post - which only appeared today! Kinda looks like you almost ended up with nothing to write about!  
 
So what happened to the "Very Special Edition of Fox Haters Week in Review" which was supposed to "ruffle a few feathers when it shows up tomorrow" as you said at 8:36 pm last night? Not so "special" after all, eh?
 
I haven't taken the time to fact-check all of your criticisms , but this one caught my eye because it seemed so astonishing - "Item: The birth of Christ dismissed as just so much "nonsense"- so I looked it up. Surprise, surprise: what was being dismissed as "nonsense" was the annual "culture war" meme that Christianity in general, and Christmas in particular, is "under attack" and that everyone should say Merry Christmas whether they are believers or not.
 
In your hurry to "prove" how "anti-Christian" Newshounds is, you sure got that one wrong.
April 5, 2009, 4:27:31 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
Correction: it was her earlier post. My bad. but good grief, this is the item you thought was so "special"??
 
One other quick comment. Perhaps the reason that Catholics get "singled out" - you seem to "not notice" (ahem) that the Religious (self)Right(eous), who are primarily Protestant, also come in for heavy criticism - is because Hannity and O'Reilly have often made a big deal out of what great Catholics they are and frequently feature Catholic spokespeople like the pompous Bill Donohoe who sees anti-catholic-biased bogeymen hiding under his bed.
April 5, 2009, 4:37:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well I'll do some fact-checking for you. The one post I took apart didn't appear today. It appeared yesterday. That's how I was able to start writing my critique last night. Right around 8:36 pm.
 
Oh and one other point. The length of this entry is what dictated that it stand alone. I've had to bump a couple of newshound embarrassments to next week's entry, where they will appear under something like 'unfinished business'. They both involve Ellen Brodsky, so when you report back she'll have an exciting week of anticipation waiting to see what she's been caught in yet again.
 
As for dismissing the birth of Christ as nonsense, I'll quote exactly what was written:
 
Rev Patrick Wooden (Upper Room Church of God), who spouted the usual nonsense -- we're not celebrating any old holiday, we're celebrating the birth of Christ
 
If that's not calling the birth of Christ "nonsense" then the English language must have changed when nobody was looking.
 
Thank you for reading J$P.
April 5, 2009, 4:39:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"Religious (self)Right(eous), who are primarily Protestant, also come in for heavy criticism"
 
Yeah? Cite for me the FNC personnel who have been ridiculed as "good Baptist boy", or "good Methodist boy". The only denomination that the newshounds repeatedly single out in that fashion is Catholics. Their writing speaks for itself.
 
Thank you for reading J$P.
April 5, 2009, 4:44:25 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"but good grief, this is the item you thought was so "special"??"
 
Well yes. It's not unusual to catch the newshounds citing a website for something it didn't say. Or getting basic facts wrong. Or doctoring quotes. Or lying about what someone on Fox said. Or attempting to smear someone via guilt by association.
 
But it is just a bit unusual to get all those sleazy tricks, and more, in one embarrassingly wrong-headed and ignorant post. And that's what made this so "special".
 
Thank you for reading J$P.
April 5, 2009, 4:48:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
I'm glad peggy came over here to make a perfect example of what lying bigots the NHs are. And she, like Priscilla, did it all in one post (4:32)!  
 
I'm glad they can abide by some sort of standards over there by never failing to lie to cover their story in as few words as possible.
 
Peggy, you are almost as valuable as Priscilla to johnny. Glad you could stop by.
April 5, 2009, 5:00:21 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
The criticism at Newshounds about how FNC has handled the issue seems to be based upon their argument that FNC has defaulted to the church establishment's position on abortion and embryonic stem cell research, rather than treating the views of liberal Catholics as being on par.
 
However, the issue IS that Notre Dame is challenging established church doctrine and church hierarchy, by giving an honorary degree to a politician who has stood for (and just recently enacted measures) that go against traditional Catholic teaching.
 
The the default position SHOULD be to challenge the challengers here. Fairness and balance is not reflected in a scenario where McCallum plays "devil's advocate" by asking the Father if it would be better for the Catholic Church to jettison centuries old teaching. Balance does not lie in her defending this argument simply because her guest, Phil Donahue, (misguiedely in my view) took this line of defense.
 
I would be very surprised if Notre Dame defends its choice to give Obama an honorary degree on such an argument as THAT. It's certainly not necessary in validating their decision to honor the President.
 
To argue that in order to be "balanced" the host should do something more than to just allow Donahue to air his preface that the Catholic Church needs to modernize its doctrine, is asking for more than balance or fairness.
April 5, 2009, 5:12:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
is because Hannity and O'Reilly have often made a big deal out of what great Catholics they are.....
Pegleg Peggy | Homepage | 04.05.09 - 4:42 pm | #  
 
"often" made a big deal???? What does that mean, "often"? Daily? Once a week? Once a month? Twice a year?
 
Just another News Hounds distortion.
April 5, 2009, 5:50:18 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Unfinished business.......
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.05.09 - 4:44 pm | #  
 
Don't forget to check the post by "Big Momma" Grodsky regrding the firemen.
 
She writes a story about the firefighters issue only to smear Fox. Never actually addressing the fact that some firefighters get special treatment because of the color of their skin.
 
That is the real issue here but she let's hate get in the way of rational thinking.
April 5, 2009, 6:00:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Once again Dollar your Fox Haters of the Week is just a bunch of lies and distorts and it just proves what a lying piece of #### you are along with Fox News.  
Posted by: Michael Weston on Sun 4.5 4:41pm  
 
Of course this Einstein is going to give us examples. Didn't think so.

Language Edited By J$
April 5, 2009, 6:26:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
Johnny,
 
Now cut that out!
 
Pardon me for my redundancy,
 
But using hard facts against false attacks,
 
And accurate quotes to dispel that which floats,
 
The words they use to abuse and accuse,
 
The lies they condone to protect their own
 
Bigotry and dishonesty,
 
Thrown back in their face to reveal their disgrace
 
And hypocricy, exposed to the light
 
For all to see, laid bare, in full sight
 
Just doesn't seem fair
 
Just doesn't seem right
 
How dare you incite!
 
It's not a fair fight!
April 5, 2009, 6:33:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Olby Sucks
It's funny how a supposed brit would know anything about a "Bible Belter," apologise for obamas shortcomings every chance he gets and hate all things Fox.
Olby Sucks | Homepage | 04.05.09 - 3:14 pm | #  
 
-----------
 
FNC come across the same way (terrible) when reporting on President Obama.
Haggis | 04.05.09 - 4:07 pm | #  
 
Right on cue.........
April 5, 2009, 6:35:42 PM EDT – Like – Reply


vermontdave
Rev Patrick Wooden (Upper Room Church of God), who spouted the usual nonsense -- we're not celebrating any old holiday, we're celebrating the birth of Christ
 
The argument being made there, in my opinion, is that the so-called "Culture War" is not about the religion itself, but the marketing of it.
 
ps.
I'm a regular at New Hounds.
pps.
I'm also a fan of vstol. Regardless of what Ellen thinks about him.
 
peace
April 5, 2009, 7:09:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
vd, you forgot to put in the rest of the quote from NHs.  
 
"Rev Patrick Wooden (Upper Room Church of God), who spouted the usual nonsense -- we're not celebrating any old holiday, we're celebrating the birth of Christ, when did saying Merry Christmas become offensive, blah blah blah."
 
The argument being made there is NOT about the marketing of the "culture war". The blah blah blah part is where the NH author belittles the pastor's words, rejecting his (paraphrased by a Christian hating NH) interview. The interview was about stores no longer saying "Merry Christmas" in order to be PC, but it seems that the NH writer doesn't like to hear those despicable words.
 
Ever more proof of the long-standing bigotry at NHs.
April 5, 2009, 8:40:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Jaynie59
I understand the point of this post was about the Newhounds typical distortion of what appears on FNC, but after watching the video I can't help but remark on the fundamental issue that started it and how it is typical of how all liberals react to everything.
 
Phil Donahue was presenting his side of the argument as if his opinion holds as much weight as the Catholic priest also being interviewed. Yet Donahue admits he is a remarried divorced man and is not allowed to take communion. In other words, Donahue is not a Catholic in good standing and he in no way represents Catholics. By his own statements, he represents Catholics who want the church to change to accommodate them. He wants a Catholic church that is "modern" and accepts pro-choice followers. His standing, which is a result of his remarriage, is in no way his own fault for not living up to his marriage vows, but the fault of the Catholic church for not allowing divorce. It's unclear if he was too cheap to pay for an annulment, or wasn't willing to lie to get one, but he made his contempt for the church very clear.
 
I find it a stretch to call Martha biased for using her own knowledge to ask a follow up question to anything any interviewee says. If anything, she showed restraint in not pointing out that Donahue is not a Catholic in good standing.
 
I'm not Catholic, btw.
April 5, 2009, 8:52:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
Haggis | 04.05.09 - 4:07 pm | #  
 
That's nice Haggy, you just said that the Newshounds were the same as Fox News. I'm sure they appreciate it.
April 5, 2009, 10:17:44 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
I'm not Catholic, btw.
Jaynie59 | 04.05.09 - 8:57 pm | #
 
Me neither. I still say Merry Christmas on Christmas, a notion the NHs seem to despise as evidenced by their writings.
April 5, 2009, 10:22:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
We've seen the racial bigotry coming from Newshounds.
 
We've seen the slurs against gays and women.
 
We've seen them call for the rape and murder of those individuals with whom they disagree.
 
After witnessing all of their foulness, and now witnessing their religious bigotry and intolerance, I realize I'm not surprised.
April 6, 2009, 12:17:41 AM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
It is well understood that being pro- or anti- an entity (group, individual, object, substance, thing) is fundamentally different from being pro-or anti- an expression (conduct, behavior, means, action).
 
It is easy to recognize the differences by examining the overriding principles and underlying motives that are engaged during the exercise of the two disparate purposes.
 
One excuses dishonesty, the other condemns it. One justifies intolerance, the other rejects it. One allows deception, the other exposes it. One permits incivility, the other bans it. One promotes hatred, the other shuns it. One finds truth an inconvience, the other finds it essential. One's raison d'etre is to tear down, the other's is to build up. One believes that anything goes in order to win, the other believes as soon as you abandon your principles, you've lost.  
 
One will eventually fail, the other will persevere.
April 6, 2009, 1:32:21 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
The mutts are all in a fury about this over at the J$ thread, but so far no one has anything to say about the exposed lies and religious intolerance that are prevalently on display there. In fact, their hatred for Christmas is more evident than ever with john t saying it's the same to him if someone says Merry Christmas or FU.  
 
Then again, picking just that one point out of the dozen or so proven lies from Priscilla is diversionary- they would rather not focus on the rest of the article but draw attention to that one proof of their intolerance.
April 6, 2009, 7:20:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Well Johnny, you sure did it this time.
 
Our Mr. Weston apparemtly went off his medications and spent a good amount of time bashing almost everyone connected to this site.
Damn!! I feel left out.
 
Of course, with all of his incoherent ramblings, he forgot to give us any evidence of lying.
 
Maybe he needs some new medications.
April 6, 2009, 8:12:28 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Lisa Krempasky
Good analysis. The left is about obscuring the truth. They cannot win on policy so they make personal attacks and try guilt by association.
April 6, 2009, 8:47:27 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
I’ve had a little time to look at part of your post in depth this morning and have a few more comments, which I will make in separate posts.
 
You write,  
 
“[Priscilla’s] headline blares: Fox News Joins Randall Terry Crusade...”
 
“She repeats that in the text, claiming Terry "joined up" with Fox News to "spin a story about a 'controversy'". Prissy presents zero evidence--nothing--that Randall Terry has any involvement or connection whatsoever with FNC's coverage. So why does his name even come up? Because Priscilla tossed him into the mix to engage in the time-honored smear: guilt by association.”
 
--------------------
 
Priscilla’s headline cites the Randall Terry INSPIRED Crusade…Not, as you claim, the “Randall Terry Crusade” against Obama and Notre Dame, even though that is exactly what it is. From everything I have read, Randall Terry started and is leading the charge. Since you don’t like links in your comments (why?) then readers can simply google these terms: Randall Terry Obama Notre Dame. Bingo! All the proof you need that Priscilla is factually correct
 
Perhaps in the body of the post Priscilla should have said that Fox News “joined up” with Randall Terry, rather than the other way around. I suspect that is what she meant and I siuspect you of nitpicking given that her headline said Fox News Joins Randall Terry. But now let’s look at further proof that Fox is heavily involved in spreading the “controversy” meme:  
 
Foxbusinessnews.com - ”business” news, mind you - has a page which reproduces, verbatim and uncritically, an Operation Rescue press release (taken from a newswire) which includes links to Terry’s website and his Stop Obama at Notre Dame page. Better yet, the Fox page then links readers to another page on its site touting the protest, and from there to even more pages on the site about the same topic. Well, Randall Terry may not have officially joined with Fox “News”, but it sure looks like Fox “News” and Fox “Business” ”News” have joined up with Randall Terry! (Operation Rescue is business news? Who knew!?) More pages, more links, and not one of them presenting anything other than straight Operation Rescue PR – oh, except for the one that pushes a gaggle of other far-right talking points under a headline reading Notre Dame Honor for Obama is Part of a Collapse in American Institutions and Their Leaders”. Fair and Balanced? I report, you decide.
 
And foxnews.com? A site search just now turned up only one article: Critics Blast Obama's Scheduled Notre Dame Commencement Address touting the conservative Catholic / far-right line.
 
It contains a link to a video purporting to showcase “opposing views” – riiiiight. The “opposing views” consist of one student mildly saying (while looking somewhat uncomfortable) that it’s brave for the university to invite someone who holds views not in line with “ideas or notions that you might not personally agree with” and that it’s not right for outside groups or even on-campus groups to try to hijack the graduates’ special day. Boy oh boy He sure told them! That sure balances statements like "It is an outrage and a scandal that 'Our Lady's University,' one of the premier Catholic universities in the United States, would bestow such an honor on President Obama given his clear support for policies and laws that directly contradict fundamental Catholic teachings on life and marriage," and “[Obama] has in fact separated science from ethics and has brought the American government, for the first time in history, into supporting direct destruction of innocent human life”!  
 
I think Priscilla made her point and I think I’ve backed it up pretty well. We win, you lose.
 
Back later with another installment of “Deconstructing Dollar”.
April 6, 2009, 8:51:28 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
Re your 4:44PM post replying to me yesterday:
 
“The one post I took apart didn't appear today. It appeared yesterday. That's how I was able to start writing my critique last night. Right around 8:36 pm.”
 
I beleive I had already corrected my error regarding that in my second post.
 
“As for dismissing the birth of Christ as nonsense, I'll quote exactly what was written:
Rev Patrick Wooden (Upper Room Church of God), who spouted the usual nonsense -- we're not celebrating any old holiday, we're celebrating the birth of Christ.
If that's not calling the birth of Christ "nonsense" then the English language must have changed when nobody was looking.”
 
How about the entire quote, Mark:  
 
“Rev Patrick Wooden (Upper Room Church of God), who spouted the usual nonsense -- we're not celebrating any old holiday, we're celebrating the birth of Christ, when did saying Merry Christmas become offensive, blah blah blah. Even Quinn was a little taken aback, & asked him why he wants to punish non-Christian store owners & employees, noting that she herself says "Happy Holidays" when she's not sure of the other person's religious beliefs. Wooden denied that he's trying to punish anyone, just that Christians should take their business to Christians. He ended by claiming that "since the early 1800s this nation has celebrated Christmas".
 
For the reading-comprehension impaired, in this context and in the context of the article as a whole, “the usual nonsense” was that because “we’re celebrating the birth of Christ”, EVERYONE should toe the Christian line and say “Merry Christmas” instead of Happy Holidays, or else Christians should only take their business to Christian stores.  
 
Newsflash: In the reality-based world, context contributes to meaning!
 
And if the Newshound who made that remark DID mean that the birth of Christ is nonsense, that is only one person's opinion and it says zip, zero, nada about Prsicilla's stance on that matter, one way or the other.
April 6, 2009, 9:07:25 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
Oh, and as far as "reporting back" to Ellen, no need - it's no news to her that you're obsessed with Newshounds in general and with her in particular!
April 6, 2009, 9:22:02 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"Priscilla’s headline cites the Randall Terry INSPIRED Crusade"
 
You are correct, though since I always cut-and-paste I think the INSPIRED might have been added later. But your poinit about INSPIRED is correct, even though it does not change the meaning whatsoever.
 
"Since you don’t like links in your comments"
 
Where do you get that from? I have no objection to links in the comments as long as they are not duplicative, and not overdone.
 
"Perhaps in the body of the post Priscilla should have said that Fox News “joined up” with Randall Terry, rather than the other way around."
 
Why? One is just as false as the other. Did newshounds "join up" with Al Qaeda to oppose the surge? That would be the same kind of charge. It's guilt by association.
 
You want to pick on the 'birth of Christ' comment by doing some fancy spinning about what the writer really meant (i.e. parsing). I think your argument there is silly but I also think it's designed to distract from other points that you have steadfastly avoided. Just like saying it doesn't represent Priscilla's stance--straw man! I never said it did!
 
All of your comments about what articles are on what websites are completely irrelevant and diversionary. Priscilla did not write about something on a website. She wrote about an interview, and lied about the content of it. She linked to a website and falsified what the website said.
 
If you want to deconstruct Dollar, why don't you start with Priscilla lying about what Martha MacCallum said, taking Fr Morris's words and putting them in her mouth to create a phony, nonexistent 'bias'? Then rewriting the rest of what she said and presenting it a verbatim quotes? You address those points and your next reply might prove to be more interesting.
 
PS: I note another criticism you have:
 
"I pointed out exactly where Dollar was lying.... [vulgarity deleted]"
 
I must have missed that, so please be specific and point to where I was "lying".
 
Thank you for reading J$P.
April 6, 2009, 9:46:49 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Pegleg Peggy | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 8:56 am | #  
 
That is only your opinion which is weak at best.
April 6, 2009, 9:47:05 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 9:51 am | #  
 
Well said Johnny. Apparently Pegleg is the official deconstructor from The Hen House. She uses the same distortion tactics that the Lady Mutts use when posting their original articles.
April 6, 2009, 9:51:41 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Fox Works Overtime on Obama Aunt Story, Takes Vacation on Palin Family Arrest
Reported by Ellen - Sun 10:18 PM
Guest blogged by Julie
 
And this is an important News Story because........???????
 
OOPS!! I forget. Anything to smear Fox.
April 6, 2009, 10:00:36 AM EDT – Like – Reply


TR
Well, when ND has graduation day, the commencement speaker will be Obama. The only thing stopping it if the administration picks someone else, or Obama chooses not to do it.  
 
Why is anyone bothered by a Happy Holidays greeting during the holiday season? How do you know someones religion by looking at them?
April 6, 2009, 10:03:52 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Priscilla
The references to Father Jonathan Morris as "baby faced" were from past threads by a former News Hounds many of which you referenced in your stroll down memory lane. I've actually referred to Morris as "well intentioned." I don't think he's "baby faced" at all as, for me, "baby faced" implies soft, smooth, and round features. Morris is boyishly handsome in a wholesome heterosexual way. He is, however, a member of an order which isn't exactly mainstream in American Catholicism and does have some dirty, clerical laundry (something that Fox loves when it involves a democrat or liberal). If Fox were truly America's newsroom, shouldn't they have, as a Catholic spokesperson, a priest who is actively involved in the day to day activities ? And why is a Roman Catholic priest given so much pretty face time? If Fox were "fair and balanced," shouldn't they utiliize clery from other denominations? To your knowledge, do they have any liberal Protestant or Jewish clergy do commentary. You're the expert on Fox. You tell me. And BTW, your CNN link was laughable. If that woman that you linked to is a religious commentator, on the level, with Morris, she is hiding somewhere. The TV Guide link froze; but before it did, i read that Jesse Jackson was a religious commentator until 1991? Again, hardly equivalent to Morris. And regarding the Catholic church in decline - people are leaving but the overall percentage is holding steady because of the influx of Hispanics. Certainly in New England, the numbers have decreased. The Pew Poll that I cited states that 1out of ever 3 Americans is an ex-Catholic. Catholic parishes are closing schools all over the country and are importing priests from foreign countries. Because of the pedopholia scandal, their finances are not good. So in decline - most assuredly. And while the church isn't democratic, the universities have a lot of latitude. It is ironic that the bishops who bray about abortion (which isn't the only issue of importance to the church) don't have the cajones to excommunicate wealthy Catholic politicians who are pro-choice. But that's a whole other discussion. Fox News is promoting a "crusade" or is it "jihad," that was inspired by Randall Terry whose views wouldn't, I think, be in accordance with mainstream Catholics. (He's no longer a Catholic). It's a wedge issue that is being ginned up by Fox and to what end other than to promote an anti Obama, anti abortion meme. Maybe they want to make Catholics feel guilty and force them to recant (ewww, shades of the Inquisition) their support of a very popular president. And regarding my knowledge of Catholocism - twelve years of Catholic education so I know the good, the bad, and the ugly. The campaign against Notre Dame is ugly and so is Fox for promoting it. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
April 6, 2009, 11:12:26 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
Now let' see, where was I ... oh yes, "Priscilla tossed [Randall Terry]into the mix to engage in the time-honored smear: guilt by association.
"...
 
Now, what a coincidence! “Guilt by association”is exactly what you proceeded to do in your post about Priscilla right after you criticized her for it! You used comments made by other Newshound bloggers in order to attempt to paint Priscilla as a hypocrite.
 
At Newshounds, each writer’s posts are his or her own - posts by individual writers are not, I repeat NOT, submitted to Ellen for approval (with the exception of guest bloggers, who post under the eye and by-line of an established writer, usually Ellen). Each blogger does his or her own thing and has his or her own access to the publishing dashboard. Each blogger has his or her own opnions. So it follows that for you to quote from other people’s posts in order to make some negative point about Priscilla is simply invalid from a logical, or even "common sense", point of view.  
 
Did Priscilla call Fr. Morris “baby-faced? No. That was Marie Therese in 2007.
 
Is she the one who wrote the approving comments about him which you use to try to make out that she is a hypocrite? No, that was Melanie (2006) and Janie (2006).
 
Did Priscilla say anything about an ultra-secret cult? No. Did she call Morris gay and a pedophile priest? No. In fact, those weren't the Newshounds at all - they were comments on the threads.  
 
So while these asides might have been useful for riling up your base – be outraged, people, be very outraged! – they have NOTHING to do with Priscilla.
 
I don't recall seeing you or your supporters here complaining about "guilt by association" when various Fox "News" entertainers and their guests tried to hit Obama via "guilt by association" with Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers (I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong). But now you complain it's a bad thing - and then proceed to do it yourself.
April 6, 2009, 11:16:42 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Why is anyone bothered by a Happy Holidays greeting during the holiday season? How do you know someones religion by looking at them?
TR | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 10:08 am | #  
 
When this matter began the issue was people being "forced" to say "Happy Holidays". Bill O'Reilly has never "demanded" that people say Merry Christmas.
April 6, 2009, 11:19:25 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"shouldn't they utiliize clery from other denominations?"
 
Are you saying they don't? Where's your proof?
 
"the overall percentage is holding steady because of the influx of Hispanics."
 
Funny you didn't state that in your article. You claimed the Church was 'in decline' without bothering to mention that its membership trends are stronger than the Protestant denominations. So if the overall percentage is steady, and the numbers are growing, ergo...they are not in decline. Thanks for finally making my point but it would have been nice if you had told that truth in your original post.
 
" read that Jesse Jackson was a religious commentator until 1991? Again, hardly equivalent to Morris."
 
You're right. In addition to appearing on various CNN programs, he hosted his own show for years. I agree, not equivalent to Morris, who has never hosted a show on Fox.
 
"That's my story and I'm sticking to it."
 
Are you sticking with the lies as well? Falsifying quotes from Martha MacCallum? Rewriting her words? Taking what her guest said, claiming she said it, then using that to claim 'bias'? What's your story on that? Enquiring minds want to know!
 
Thank you for reading J$P.
April 6, 2009, 11:22:45 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Priscilla | 04.06.09 - 11:17 am | #
 
Even when you are wrong on several matters?  
 
Like I have said you and your ilk have a hate Fox agenda and you will lie, distort and smear in order to advance that agenda.
April 6, 2009, 11:22:58 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"You used comments made by other Newshound bloggers in order to attempt to paint Priscilla as a hypocrite."
 
Really? I thought I noted other newshound comments to illustrate other newshound comments. If there is somewhere where I attacked Priscilla for what some other newshound said or wrote, please, point it out to me.
 
"they have NOTHING to do with Priscilla."
 
I never claimed they did. The title of the article is Fox Haters In Depth. That's HaterS...plural. It's not solely about Priscilla, it's also about a trend by newshound writers, and commenters, that I've documented. I thought that was made pretty clear when, after citing the NH background on Fr Morris, I said: "Back to Priscilla". If that's unclear to you it means, now we are going to change the subject from all these other people and return to discussing Priscilla. Didn't you see that? You really should read more carefully.
 
Thank you for reading J$P.
April 6, 2009, 11:30:27 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Pegleg Peggy
"Priscilla’s headline cites the Randall Terry INSPIRED Crusade"..
You are correct, though ...
 
Okay, thanks.
 
--------------------
 
"Since you don’t like links in your comments"...
Where do you get that from? I have no objection to links in the comments as long as they are not duplicative, and not overdone.  
 
My misunderstanding. Oops!
 
-----------------------
 
 
"Perhaps in the body of the post Priscilla should have said that Fox News “joined up” with Randall Terry, rather than the other way around."
Why? One is just as false as the other. Did newshounds "join up" with Al Qaeda to oppose the surge? That would be the same kind of charge. It's guilt by association.
 
Oh come on, its a turn of phrase. "Joined up" ideologically, then. I think you're being a little overly picky here.
 
-------------------
 
You want to pick on the 'birth of Christ' comment by doing some fancy spinning about what the writer really meant (i.e. parsing). I think your argument there is silly but...
 
I think you're doing a bit of parsing yourself there. BTW, I have frequently taken people to task at NH over anything I thought was a gratuitous slam at Christianity. I wouldn't stand over this if I thought that's what it was.
 
------------
 
I also think it's designed to distract from other points that you have steadfastly avoided.  
 
I'm not done yet!   
 
Just like saying it doesn't represent Priscilla's stance--straw man! I never said it did  
See my post here on "guilt by association"
 
----------------
 
All of your comments about what articles are on what websites are completely irrelevant and diversionary.  
 
No, they are designed to show that Fox is promoting the Randall Terry Jihad without balance, and has in that sense "joined up".
 
-------------
 
Priscilla did not write about something on a website. She wrote about an interview, and lied about the content of it. She linked to a website and falsified what the website said.
If you want to deconstruct Dollar, why don't you start with Priscilla lying about what Martha MacCallum said, taking Fr Morris's words and putting them in her mouth to create a phony, nonexistent 'bias'? Then rewriting the rest of what she said and presenting it a verbatim quotes? You address those points and your next reply might prove to be more interesting.
 
Whether these prove to be true or false have no bearing on the validity of the points I've made.
 
------------------
 
PS: I note another criticism you have:
"I pointed out exactly where Dollar was lying.... [vulgarity deleted]"
I must have missed that, so please be specific and point to where I was "lying".
 
What gets said in a tiny little corner of the NH O/T stays in a tiny little corner of the NH O/T!   
 
OTTOMH I can't remember what I was referring to, I'll have a look and get back to you later.
April 6, 2009, 11:37:34 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"Whether these prove to be true or false have no bearing on the validity of the points I've made."
 
Classic.
April 6, 2009, 11:41:40 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Keg
What in the hell are we talking about here?
April 6, 2009, 11:47:40 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
Classic.
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 11:46 am | #  
 
Dan Rather would be proud.
April 6, 2009, 11:50:02 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Priscilla
Per the American Religious Identification Survey
 
1990 - 26.2 Roman Catholic
2008 - 25.1
 
http://livinginliminality.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/aris_report_2008.pdf
April 6, 2009, 11:50:34 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
So now you're trying to do research that you should have done in the article itself? The source you cited in your post as proof that the Church is 'in decine' actually said that the % of Catholics has remained steady, while the % of Protestants has declined. That was your citation. Now, because I pointed out how you misrepresented your own source, you go out and find another one that suits your purposes better? Sorry, but that doesn't change the falsity of what you wrote. I can't do a post and predict what ex-post-facto evidence you will come up with two days later, nor would I want to. My critique was of what you wrote, not what you suddenly thought up after being exposed.
 
By the way, your source (this new one that you just cited) states that there are 11 million more Catholics now than in 1990. If that's your post-game rationalization for 'in decline' then you are welcome to it.
 
PS: Oh I just noticed the dates you chose from your 'new' source. Interesting that if one compares 2001 to 2008 the % of Catholics actually increases. So even your new source shows that while the % of Catholics was in decline around 2001, it's now on the upswing again. In other words, it's not 'in decline'. Again, while this is all very interesting, you're going outside of your original post to make extraneous points, when my critique was on what you wrote and published.
April 6, 2009, 12:06:08 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
I do find it interesting that Catholics have increased by 11 Million.  
 
Doesn't Lou Dobbs, over at CNN, keep screaming about 12-20 Million illegal immigrants?  
I think he believes a great deal of these illegal immigrants come from Mexico and since most Hispanics are usually Catholic, I find those two set of statistics rather interesting.

Edited By Siteowner
April 6, 2009, 1:57:30 PM EDT – Like – Reply


2008
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 12:11 pm | #  
---------------
 
Another good catch Johnny. "Priscilla" (claudo in drag) has always had a deep proclivity to endlessly lie and smear. I have caught him time and again posting false and misleading information. I honesty believe claudo takes some kind of perverse gratification from his deceitful commentary. I actually feel quite sorry for one like he who obviously feels compelled to act in such a completely mendacious manner.
 
That being said I can certainly see why Ellen chose to promoteclaudo to the elevated status of "Priscilla". Birds of a feather.....Eh?
.

Edited By Siteowner
April 6, 2009, 2:06:04 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well I consider any speculation that claudo = Priscilla as just that, speculation, absent any actual evidence to that effect.
April 6, 2009, 2:26:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Olby Sucks
onefortheroad | 04.06.09 - 2:02 pm | #
 
Why do you hate Lou?
April 6, 2009, 2:46:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
"Edited By Siteowner", that's an understatement!
 
What was wrong with the other 3/4ths of the post you deleted?
 
BBC not considered a Cable Network in the US?
 
I am sure I can find an American source, so what is the difference? It is still being talked about on your media. You don't make it easy for foreign posters to contribute to your site, do you?
April 6, 2009, 2:53:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
1. The rest of your post was entirely off-topic.
 
B. BBC could be considered a cable news network...somewhere. But if you want to post a BBC link in a thread where it might be appropriate, make sure the subject matter of the link is cable news.
April 6, 2009, 2:58:42 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Lakeview Greg
Nice to see you promote gay hate by letting 2008's cracks about people in drag through...
 
You can wrap it pretty, but your arrogance and stupidity come through loud and clear, Koldys.
 
What you did to Ellen was the stuff of spoiled brats. Well, if the smelly shoe fits...
 
Enjoy life in the margins.
April 6, 2009, 3:15:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
"1. The rest of your post was entirely off-topic."
 
Sorry, I thought this was an "open" thread.
You have a habit if shift things to different threads from here, and playing hide and seek with certain posts, so why not that one?
 
I don't see how I was off-topic. I was continuing a conversation I had with your vistrol the last time I was here.
 
Any way, what is the topic at hand? 
Religion,
Catholicism,
"Priscilla", who ever she may be,
I am not sure what any of that has to do with "American Cable News"
 
Yes I cited the BBC, but are you telling me it is not being discussed on American Media too? 
 
So I ask once again, do I have to quote an American Cable source or is it the subject matter that you object to?
April 6, 2009, 3:29:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
Why do you hate Lou?
Olby Sucks | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 2:51 pm | # 
 
I wouldn't say I hate him! He has some valid points, but since his time change he interferes with my Prime Time Viewing. The "ER's" of this world!
 
Illegal Immigration is one of his 'pet' subjects, that is all, and he can get a little dramatic about it. I prefer my news to be news, if I want drama, I prefer ER!
April 6, 2009, 4:03:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Welcome to another episode of "Attack the Webmaster". Our first contestant today: onefortheroad...
 
"You have a habit if shift things to different threads from here, and playing hide and seek with certain posts, so why not that one?"
 
Tell me about this habit. What are the posts I play hide and seek with, and shift to different threads from here? Since it's a 'habit' you should have no problem citing multiple examples. (cue Jeopardy music here)
 
When you reply with your examples I'll explain to you how you can always spot an 'open thread' by the fact that it's attached to a post that says 'open therad'.
April 6, 2009, 4:39:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
As an outsider, I come to your site and I see, what looks like an open thread entitled "recent comments". 
 
I assume, again as an outsider, that this is a continuous thread. But if I click on a particular comment, I may or may not see some or all of the posts, on haloscan, from what looks like a continuous thread called "recent comments". 
 
I think I have figured this out now, but when it was compounded with some posts not materializing at all - the last time I was here - it did get very confusing for awhile.
 
You are use to your site, so this may seem logical to you. I am just telling you how it can confuse some not use to your site.
 
If you want a list of missing posts or posts that ended up somewhere I didn't expect them to be. You are right I probably can't provide them. 
 
I don't normally keep a "word" copy when I am posting on a blog. Nor am I familiar enough with your site to go back and find them in your history. So lecture away!
April 6, 2009, 5:15:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Peggy,
 
I've been looking at CNN's coverage of the Notre Dame brouhaha and while I've seen nothing that linked to any sites, they relay the National Right to Life organization's (not a Catholic group per se) statements on the issue in their entirety and also give the web address to the organization response for the petition opposing Obama's honorary degree.
 
I wouldn't consider THAT as CNN "joining with" either of those organizations.
April 6, 2009, 5:21:15 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
[message deleted: still off-topic...it might be on topic in an open thread, but this is not an open thread, and frankly the subject matter's connection to cable news is extremely tenuous.]

Edited By Siteowner
April 6, 2009, 5:24:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
Cleveland 'Irish" Phil never answered any of Martha's questions, Fr. Morris respectfully answered her questions and repeatedly tried but failed to bring Phil back into the debate, which was NOT about President Obama speaking at Notre Dame's commencement ceremony, but the university bestowing an honorarium upon an individual who does not meet the university's own criteria and standards for being a recipient of an honor, yet Priscilla finds fault with Ms. MacCallum, FOX News and Fr. Morris for not being "fair and balanced" by using false quotes, distortions, innuendo, statistical misrepresentations, outright lies and more of the NH's stock in trade.
 
And instead of admitting Priscilla obviously made mistakes, Peg ignores the proof, offers up a convoluted defense of a typical disingenuous, FOX slurring NH article and attacks the messenger who exposed the dishonesty.
 
Go figure.
April 6, 2009, 5:30:15 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Lakeview Greg, 
 
The term "in drag" is not an essentially pejorative one, or one with innate implications concerning sexuality.
April 6, 2009, 5:33:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
don't normally keep a "word" copy when I am posting on a blog. Nor am I familiar enough with your site to go back and find them in your history. So lecture away!
onefortheroad | 04.06.09 - 5:20 pm | # 
 
Johnny, is there any way this could be done in private email, because it's more about site rules, and judging from past exchanges with 14tr, seems to go in circles.
April 6, 2009, 5:39:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
onefortheroad | 04.06.09 - 5:20 pm 
 
The last couple of times you were here, I explained the "open thread." the different topic threads and how comments are either attached to the topic they are posted under or to the thread of a comment that is clicked for a reply.
 
I also welcomed you here and suggested you 'hang in there.'
 
It appears my attempts to help have been overlooked or ignored.
 
So, who's doing the lecturing here?
April 6, 2009, 5:42:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"Johnny, is there any way this could be done in private email"
 
Cece, it's already over, but if 14tr wants to continue it, email is a most excellent suggestion.
April 6, 2009, 5:46:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
It's interesting how people perceive things, because I think the equal time response by the student defending the university's decision to honor Pres. Obama (referenced by Peggy), to be the singularly most articulate and poignantly compelling argument I've seen on either side of the issue.
 
I'm not sure if Peggy felt it was not up to snuff in providing balance to the other side's talk of church heresy because the student wasn't screaming "Inquisitors!", but it was an utterly lucid and eloquent summation of the thinking of the University as argued by that institution's chief charge-- a student...
April 6, 2009, 5:51:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
What gets said in a tiny little corner of the NH O/T stays in a tiny little corner of the NH O/T! 
Pegleg Peggy | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 11:42 am | #
 
---------------------------------
 
I find it laughable how Patrick and Peggy keep reminding everyone how the J$ thread there is such a tiny part of the site. Let's see...
 
J$ OT thread started 2-24, 42 days ago and it has 1049 comments as of now. That's 25 posts per day. 
 
A thread with a similar amount of participation, When Were you Born, has 1202 comments as of now and was started Fri 6-23-06, 1019 days ago. That's 1.2 posts per day.
 
The beloved NH Neocon Wingnut Quote thread started Tues 5-9-06 (1064 days ago) and has 5427 comments. That's 5 posts per day.
 
Now that it's established that the J$ OT thread is one of the busiest and most visited threads on NH OT, if not THE BUSIEST thread there, pray tell, Peggy and Patrick, who is obsessed with who? 
 
J$P regulars know that we're loved (some of us are even stalked). The proof is in the numbers. Thanks, NHs!
April 6, 2009, 6:42:29 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
onefortheroad, please do not post off-topic comments in this thread. And as said above, if you want to complain/question/inquire about the posting rules or other such admin issues, please take it to email. You are repeatedly trying to change the topic of this thread to something completely different, and I thought I made it clear this is not an open thread and that discussion of extraneous matters would not continue here. This is an explanation of why your off-topic posts did not go thru on this thread. It's also the last explanation I'll post here. Thank you so much.
April 6, 2009, 6:52:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
Fox Fan | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 6:47 pm | # 
 
Hey FF - good analysis. What else can be said but they love us, we're all they talk about. A few have even detailed how their deepest fantasies involve some of us.
 
Who can blame them? I know I'm quite a catch! Quite lovable in fact, and there are plenty of others here who are equally as adorable as me!
April 6, 2009, 7:07:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
While reading the FNC reports that Peggy referenced, I came across an interview from Greta's show where she quizzed a critic of Notre Dame's decision to grant Obama an honorary degree, by referencing the Pope's opposition to the Iraq War.
 
I'm not a Catholic, but I would assume that there is a difference between a Papal enunciation on matters of abortion, contraception, marriage, sacraments, etc., with Papal views on specific political or national policy issues, such as a particular war, etc.
 
Is that wrong?
April 6, 2009, 7:16:22 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
There are matters of dogma (like life issues) and there are matters that are not dogma (like the national policy issues you list). The Pope can provide guidance on the latter but his opinions are not dogma.
April 6, 2009, 7:22:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
and there are plenty of others here who are equally as adorable as me!
Ashley | 04.06.09 - 7:12 pm | # 
 
Are you sure of that, Ashley? Because I think you just may be singular in that regard.
April 6, 2009, 7:26:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
Cecelia | 04.06.09 - 7:31 pm | #
 
You may be the most adorable of all!
April 6, 2009, 8:50:17 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Mr. Weston appears to have lost his mind. He is attacking his own group and still has time to smear some members of this site. Busy man.
 
Other people get banned for a lot less at the Hen House.
April 7, 2009, 9:10:28 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
The little one has gone crazy, he's accused me specifically and many others here, unnamed, of making fun of Keith Olbermann's deceased mother on J$P.
 
I know the l'il feller is a liar, a vulgar and vile one at that, but he appears to have gone far, VERY far, off the deep end today.
April 7, 2009, 1:50:48 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Ashley | 04.07.09 - 1:55 pm | #
 
Mr. Weston is the worst kind of liar. A drunken liar.
April 7, 2009, 5:56:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
The l'il feller is squabbling with another poster, claiming that poster is a "J$" troll. Weston is obviously wrong or deliberately lying. He fabricated a ficticious post that he claims was posted here by the other poster (Captain America). He then claims it was actually posted by someone here hijacking CAs name (all a lie since the post doesn't exist in the first place). Then it appears the l'il feller apparently created a new name on the hounds site (Sucks Olbermann) and is claiming that it proves that it is our own OS who is stirring up trouble among the hounds.
 
Oh, when challenged that maybe it was he, Weston, who may have posted here under the Capt. America name, he denied it citing his "banning" from J$P as proof that he couldn't have done it. I guess he forgot his childish boasting the other day that he had "infiltrated" J$P and posted as "The Game".
 
The question remains, is Weston really the smartest of the newshounds?
April 7, 2009, 9:19:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
"Captain America" who posted here was apparently recognized as the banned and fetid Patrick since the post was removed. Probably just another Patrick proxy, hopefully the real CA recognizes the immature child he's dealing with.
April 7, 2009, 10:11:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
So Patrick/Weston wanted to 'prove' Captain America posted here so he created a 'Captain America' post of his own...then immediately quoted it back at NH as 'proof' that CA really was posting here? Makes sense.
 
I see where Patrick's denying that because he claims he's 'banned' here. Actually nobody is banned here. But all comments have to pass pre-moderation, so impostors can slip thru if I don't catch who they really are.
April 7, 2009, 10:45:15 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
Let's hear it for CA's courage.
 
Astoundingly, he's one of just several News Hounders who have been horrified by Patrick and who disapprove of the thread in general.
 
Plopping her posts amidst missives containing hateful words for gays and women , and vulgarity that would make a pornographer say "enough!", Ellen posted that she was just "fine" with thread.
April 7, 2009, 11:23:22 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
Well, the l'il feller is still upset with me. He didn't take kindly to my 9:24 post. In response to who Captain America was, here is what the little one posted on the newshounds site:
 
First of all Gagboy, there was a post here asCapt America ,and it was soon deleted by you father. 
 
My father is deleting posts on the newshounds site? Who is my father? Let's roll the tape...
 
You wish I did the post, but sorry your daddy put me on Excile Island, And yes I did get in last week, but I used an older computer.
Posted by: Michael Weston on Tue 4.7 9:15pm 
 
Wow Johnny, I didn't know you could deletes posts on Newshounds!!!! Or maybe the little one is claiming Ellen is my father! 
 
The tape continues as the little one debates who posted on Newshounds as "S.O.", a new poster membership created at the time the l'il feller was posting there...
 
As for the Suck Olberman, I have no idea who did that, maybe your boyfriend did it. Why does a hermaphradite like you care what I say
 
Interesting that the l'il feller would call me a "hermaphradite".
 
Here is what SO wrote"and I want to let all of you know that I am an idiot and that I am love with a hermaphradite. Hello Ashley.
All My Love
Suck Olbermann
Posted by: Sucks Olbermann on Tue 4.7 7:07pm 
 
Though he did spell "Hermaphrodite" correctly in other posts and later on in the same post, here is an example of his making the same exact typo in spelling as SO, who he claims not to be.
 
The l'il feller may not be the dumbest person on Earth, but he's close.
April 8, 2009, 12:32:55 AM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
Is this thread still accepting posts, or is it now closed to posting?
April 8, 2009, 10:09:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
I see it is working, what a relief! 
 
Not that anything can be posted on it, but a relief non-the-less.
 
How can a Canadian, who doesn't get Fox, be a Fox hater? Because I disagreed with A SEGMENT of Red Eye?
 
Haven't you figured out yet that most Canadians disagreed with and found that segment distasteful? Yet Fox would like to increase their coverage here? You don't find these two things at odds with each other? Therefore I am a Fox Hater.
 
Your deductions are strange, but at least I now know where I stand!
April 8, 2009, 10:57:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Olby Sucks
Your deductions are strange, but at least I now know where I stand!
onefortheroad | 04.08.09 - 11:02 pm | # 
 
Can we call you an "O'Reilly worshipper" like all of the rest of us? Because anyone that doesn't hate Fox is an "O'Reilly worshipper." Just ask, you'll see......
April 8, 2009, 11:34:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
Olby Sucks | Homepage | 04.08.09 - 11:39 pm | #
 
What is it you don't understand about the fact that I DO NOT receive Fox........so your question is mute.
April 9, 2009, 12:32:36 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
14TR, didn't you hear that Greg Gutfeld is leaving FNC to go work for a Canadian TV show?
 
And it's "moot", not "mute".
April 9, 2009, 7:16:05 AM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
14TR, didn't you hear that Greg Gutfeld is leaving FNC to go work for a Canadian TV show?
 
And it's "moot", not "mute".
Fox Fan | Homepage | 04.09.09 - 7:21 am | # 
 
A) nitpicking again? That's is where I started with this site.
 
B) Who the heckl is Greg Gutfeld when he's at home? 
 
C) They are all sort of interchangeable, aren't they........Paula Zahn? Keith Olbermann use to work for Fox didn't he?
 
D) Is there a way to enlarge the font on Haloscan, since you request perfection, being able to read what I type would be nice.
 
Have a Great day.
April 9, 2009, 10:39:10 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
This diversion about Red Eye is off topic for this thread.
April 9, 2009, 10:43:03 AM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
What is the tread not working again, by last reply hasn't materialized.
April 9, 2009, 12:26:18 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Look, I'm tired of having to baby-sit your messages, many of which are complaining about the rules, the threads, or lying that I'm somehow mysteriously moving your posts from one thread to another. That's why some of your comments don't get published.
 
I told you yesterday, if you have a problem or question with the rules, take it to email. I thought you agreed. Instead you've been bringing it up over and over again apparently in the expectation that I'll let you take over a thread with this crap. Well I won't.
 
If you can't follow the rules and stay on topic, then go somewhere else. If you bring up this stuff about the rules or the threads or how "they" are moving your posts around one more time you will enjoy an unplanned vacation.
April 9, 2009, 12:35:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
I think I have the question of Threads figured out. Thank you, for your patience , sorry if it took me too long. 
 
I am now on the Fox Haters Thread, does Gitfeld work for the show that can't be mentioned. Gee I'm sorry, didn't mean to offend.
 
Where is he going to work in Canada, for which network?
April 9, 2009, 1:05:00 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
OK, you insist on going off topic again (not counting the ones that didn't get thru), so all I have to say is...enjoy your stay.
April 9, 2009, 1:07:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
I tried to call Michael Weston to offer my condolences on his being bounced out of NH. He didn't take my call, but I'm pretty sure he called me back and left the following message on my voice mail:
 
 
Michael Weston Voice Mail
April 9, 2009, 5:20:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Olby Sucks
http://foxnewsboycott.com/
 
"Here they come to save the day!"
 
:lol:
April 9, 2009, 5:33:26 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Wow, Michael Weston gets banned at NHs and Grammie pops up a minute later...coincidence?
 
Just kidding Grammie, excellent job in engaging them to explain Patsy's past and Patrick's effect on their site's image. It's good that you make your case against Patsy after your past experiences with him at OW.
 
Ellen finally did the right thing after Patrick had half a dozen NHs spitting mad about his demeanor and language. That raises her +1 on the likability scale to a whopping 1!
April 9, 2009, 7:11:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
FF, you do realize that half or more of them are convinced I'm not the commenter that I started with 3 years ago and have remined all this time.
 
They have accused me of being a forty year old guy shape shifting to sneak in to plant nastiness and discord in their fragrantly blooming gardens of peace, love and tranquility.
April 9, 2009, 7:49:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
I'm very impressed with how you hold your temper even as Patsy is popping up with the personal attacks. And of course that nice, nice Pegleg, who drops by here every now and then and comments...on a site that doesn't allow people like her to comment? I'm not sure I get that part. Nicely done, Grammie. Represent!
April 9, 2009, 7:57:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply


flindycon
Being someone who isn't personally involved with this fued between the pound and this site, I did notice that those over at the pound provided one excuse after another when confronted with Grammie's concerns of why none of the mutts stood up to the slur-slinging MW sooner. No hint of embarassment, or shame. I love that libertarian excuse given that the mutts are "democrats and they police themselves." I am personally glad those types aren't what the real world police force in my area consists of. Pathetic.
April 9, 2009, 8:27:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply


notveryhow
FF, you do realize that half or more of them are convinced I'm not the commenter that I started with 3 years ago and have remined all this time.
 
They have accused me of being a forty year old guy shape shifting to sneak in to plant nastiness and discord in their fragrantly blooming gardens of peace, love and tranquility.
"Grammie | 04.09.09 - 7:54 pm | 
 
My, how incredibly disengenious of you.
April 9, 2009, 9:08:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
I wouldn't go calling her disingenuous, but I was wondering the same thing nvh. 
 
Where did they accuse you of being a forty year old man Grammie? I saw a wolf in sheep's clothing by peggy, but no shapeshifting.
April 9, 2009, 9:59:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
Who's Patsy?
 
Just when I think I have it all figured out, you throw me another curve. 
 
The conversation in your recent comments, seems to be the same conversation but on two different threads. I'll leave it as a statement, because I don't want to annoy anyone by asking too many questions.
April 9, 2009, 10:09:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Actually 14TR, I just found out today who Patsy is thanks to Grammie. Patsy is AAP, aka A*** A** Plug. You're not as far behind as you think, I always thought Patsy meant one who is easily taken advantage of.
 
Your confusion about the "recent comments" sidebar is that you seem to think that the sidebar comments are consecutive on a single article's comments. They are the recent comments of all the articles' comments, not a single thread.
 
Ask johnny for my email if you need further explanation.
April 9, 2009, 10:42:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
I see what look like new faces tonight.
 
flindycon & notveryhow. 
 
I somehow don't think the first will be joining me here on the Fox Haters Thread, but I have hopes for the later.
 
I found it lonely here this afternoon, so I returned to my Canadian play grounds.
April 9, 2009, 10:48:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Where did they accuse you of being a forty year old man Grammie? I saw a wolf in sheep's clothing by peggy, but no shapeshifting.
Fox Fan | Homepage | 04.09.09 - 10:04 pm | # 
 
As I have informed them at NH it was several weeks ago.
 
I do remember commenting on it here at the time.
 
I thought it was two guys having a brief conversation about it but if it is still there it would probably take a little while to find it .
 
No great shakes one way or the other. I know what I read and whoever posted knows they did it.
April 9, 2009, 10:59:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
No Fox Fan I have figured that out, what confused me tonight is what seemed to be one conversation was divided between two different "articles' comments" as you call them.
 
I would have thought to find them all here on this Fox Haters Thread, but they don't seem to be.
 
Thank you for the offer of help, it is appreciated.
April 9, 2009, 11:14:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Olby Sucks
but I have hopes for the later.
 
--------
 
The latter you refer to is a Fox Hater, to be sure.
April 9, 2009, 11:15:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply


onefortheroad
No great shakes one way or the other. I know what I read and whoever posted knows they did it.
Grammie | 04.09.09 - 11:04 pm | #
 
Before they met you Grammie, didn't you just go over to visit someone tonight or am I misunderstanding the conversation?
April 9, 2009, 11:20:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Comments from multiple articles (noun, thing) are the articles' comments. As I call them.
April 9, 2009, 11:26:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
Grammie,
 
Not the original reference, but perhaps an even more revealing comment, expecially in light of recent event.
-------------============--------------
 
I was over there this evening. It was "Get Peggy" time for the Dollies. For me it was Tai Chi time  
 
They're supposed to come back with links to where I supposedly called some of them c*nts, whores and comfort girls. Maybe one of you will alert me if they come up with one. I've had enough of that place to last me for a long time. 
 
Then there is Grammie. Man, s/he hates my guts!! (wasn't there speculation that Grammie is actually the sockpuppet of one of the guys?)According to the Myopic One (you'd have to see the thread)I should be the languge police over here and kick your butts every time you guys use sexist terms like c*nt, whore, slut etc. The fact that I don't rise up and whup you all upside the head for that means to Grammie that I condone it. For the record: I don't condone it. I have taken people to task for that stuff on the mains, but as far as I'm concerned the Dollar Dollies can fight their own battles. I am certainly not going to fight them for THEM!!!! 
 
Notably, Grammie didn't say boo when FoxFan called me something really gross the other day. I guess her moral outrage only runs in one direction! 
 
G'nite! 
_________________ 
Posted by: pegleg peggy on Fri 3.20 8:29pm
April 9, 2009, 11:47:36 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Before they met you Grammie, didn't you just go over to visit someone tonight or am I misunderstanding the conversation?
onefortheroad | 04.09.09 - 11:25 pm | # 
 
I don't think I understand you, Roadie.
 
Not all but some read and even comment here enough to at least recognize my name and have some vague idea of my persona.
 
Is this what you were getting at?
April 9, 2009, 11:53:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well that didn't take long. You're registered there for all of, what, five hours? And Ellen is already threatening to ban you:
 
I'm calling a halt to this who said what to Grammie thing. I don't care if its feelings were hurt or not and whether or not the hurt feelings were justified. 
Grammie, I'm going to delete any further comments from you that are not on topic. My patience is thin tonight so if I have to delete too many comments from you, I am going to ban you.
Posted by: Ellen on Thu 4.9 10:51pm
 
Note particularly the phrase: I don't care if its feelings were hurt or not. Already the proprietress of the 'unmoderated' forum is calling you an "it" and threatening to ban you.
 
Welcome to the dog pound.
April 10, 2009, 12:01:20 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Olby Sucks
My patience is thin tonight so if I have to delete too many comments from you, I am going to ban you.
Posted by: Ellen on Thu 4.9 10:51pm
 
That's how they "police themselves."
April 10, 2009, 12:24:30 AM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
If one of us had that sort of thing, Marky, Grammie (is it really female?) and the other self righteous, circle jerks would be tut-tutting about our lack of decorum and decency. Marky would even engage in his strange and self important "quorum" to banish us. He's not licensed to practice law; but he plays a lawyer on the blogs. But now Marky has eh boy and what a great addition to the "coven" (description of Michael's church by Grammie or one of the buttboys/girls.) Be so proud, Marky. Your "cable news blog" has degenerated into a silly bitch fest about us. 
 
And BTW, I'm the one who called Cecelia a "comfort girl" as she does seem to whore herself out (metaphorically speaking) to her main man. And here's the thing, Cece, if you don't like it - too, f**king, bad. Boo, f**king, hoo. If the girdle (you're an older gal, right?) fits, wear it! 
Posted by: claudo on Sat 3.21 11:37am ===---===---===
 
Claudo, LOL! 
 
Peggy, Exactly right. That's why I have no problem with this thread. 
Posted by: Ellen on Sat 3.21 2:25pm ===---===---===
 
To quote Keith the Ingrate:
 
Is there something of a double standard here or am I being a little--a little oversensitive?
 

April 10, 2009, 12:25:29 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Hm. Ellen refers to Grammie as "it". Claudo refers to Grammie as "it". Just sayin'...
April 10, 2009, 12:30:26 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Well guys, this little old grey haired "it" is a bit tired but I can't let this erroneous interpretation stand.
 
Johnny, you as an old movie buff deliberately took their kind comments the wrong way.
 
I am absolutely certain that they were comparing me to Clara Bow, the one and only "It" girl! Right???????
April 10, 2009, 12:54:18 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
I was thinking about posting here to express my view that the collective average IQ at the pound went up 50 points since they finally wised up to the little one. But after reading their trashing of Grammie, it appears their collective average IQ dropped 50 points since Patrick left.
 
Patrick, I think I may owe you an apology.
 
Flashback:
 
Do you forget so soon that Tom the Tax Cheat Daschle was the Senate Majority Leader from 2001-2003?
 
Ashley | 02.11.09 - 12:50 am
------------------------
 
I think you have "majority" and "minority" mixed up. For Daschle to have been the majority leader from 2001 to 2003, Dems would have had to control the Senate then.
 
Are you that damned misinformed?
john t | Homepage | 02.11.09 - 1:00 am | # 
 
For my newshound friends - dump John T and that collective average IQ of yours goes back up.
April 10, 2009, 1:04:09 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
Darn! It looks like my last two comments were PURGED (I do mean PURGE with all it's connotations) as if they were zapped down the memory hole in 1984. Nary a trace to be found.
 
Fortunately I copied them before the fairy dust whisked them away into Never Never Land.
 
"I finally found what I was looking for:
 
"This, from "Grammie"
 
"Ah, but notice how assiduously (just a little KO lingo) he avoids contemplating meeting moi, a sweet little gray haired old lady,. Ummm! I wonder why"
 
My guess he's in his 40's and divorced. You know, I seem to recall that "Grammie" was trolling on the mains about a year ago....Somehow, I don't think a little old gray haired lady would be hanging at Dollar's where a lot of trash talk is taking place. Dollar's blog is, like the Olbermann Watch obsession, very testosterone (or is a lack of) driven.
 
Posted by: claudo on Sun 3.22 2:08pm
What about Assley? Male or Female? Or just a big asskisser?
 
Posted by: Michael Weston on Sun 3.22 2:19pm
 
No lady forgets being accused of really being a guy!
 
Posted by: Grammie on Thu 4.9 11:32pm 
 
Gee, I thought that me and all my confused yet deviously deliberate confused lies and stuff was the topic.
 
I didn't notice any of them, including Ellen, talking about anything other than me so how can I be "off topic"?
 
I sure wish I were as smart as MW and johnt so I could understand this eosteric stuff that the mutts scatter around their kennel.
April 10, 2009, 1:51:19 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
My last and final masterpiece at the kennel:
 
"I will ask you again what you meant by this b/c I don't know what you are talking about:
 
Obviously you know what you are talking about or think you do.
 
How about explaining what the hell you are talking about here:
 
Grammie posting here, C, then coming back hewre and denying that it was her post is pretty sad. She is, at best, a very confused woman. And at worst....
_________________
I remain,
Sincerely,
notveryhow
 
Posted by: notveryhow on Thu 4.9 10:21pm
 
"Grammie posting here" - Yep, I just registered and started posting here tonight. I understand that and agree.
 
Grammie posting here, then playing kiss and tell going back to J$ and spinning a tall tale, then coming back hewre and denying that it was her post is pretty sad. She is, at best, a very confused woman. And at worst....
_________________
I remain,
Sincerely,
notveryhow
 
Posted by: notveryhow on Thu 4.9 10:21pm
 
Posted by: Grammie on Thu 4.9 10:38pm Edit/Delete this post " - the only comment I had made at J$P when you posted this was to FF re the theory that I am a 40 year old male.
 
"then coming back hewre and denying that it was her post is pretty sad" - I think I know what you meant now. I did not deny that I had made a comment to ff. I denied that i was portrayed as having quoted someone from this site on this thread. The quotation I was benying was used on my PARAPHRASE of the accusation that I was a 40 year etc.
 
BTW, you might have noticed I did find the original accusation so you need to rethink some of your comments. "
 
Somehow I thought better of Eyore. I don't why he was so eager to believe that I was lying. Not only lying but doing so with not even the finesse and credibility that a two year old could muster trying to deny the stolen cookie smeared over his face and the crumbs dropping from his mouth.
April 10, 2009, 2:03:38 AM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
So Grammie, if I got this right, they spent hours calling you names, saying you were lying, etc etc (all this over a comment made here not there). And then when you located the proof that you told the truth and posted it, Ellen deleted it?
 
There couldn't be a more representative example of their sleazy dishonesty than what they did to you.
 
I'm still fascinated by how they refer to you as "it". Perhaps in the future I should return the favor.
April 10, 2009, 9:27:54 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Grammie
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.10.09 - 9:32 am | #
 
That is exactly what happened.
 
I might add that both comments were not just deleted but were purged (now I see why my innocent, at the time, use of the word had them so riled up) in mere minutes.
 
Ellen must have been on high alert with her finger already on the trigger ready to protect her innocent loving flock from me, The Wolf In Sheep's Clothing (H/T Pegleg) from even a fleeting glance at what they had all been clamoring for.
 
"I'm still fascinated by how they refer to you as "it". Perhaps in the future I should return the favor."
 
I have noticed the same thing being done to others from this site. Wasn't that one of the prime tactics of the Nazis to consistently refer to Jews, Poles, Slavs etc in nonhuman terms b/c the dehumanization helped erase any angst over their tactics. Come to think of it the Allies did the same thing to a far lesser degree to the Japanese.
April 10, 2009, 10:37:28 AM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
And then when you located the proof that you told the truth and posted it, Ellen deleted it? There couldn't be a more representative example of their sleazy dishonesty than what they did to you.johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.10.09 - 9:32 am | =-=-=-=
 
How 'bout this as a "representative example of their sleazy dishonesty?"
 
From a discussion I was having with john t after he brought up a "Fox Haters Thread."
 
Here is a new one from Dollar's "Fox Haters Thread": "Why Ellen brought up the old Vitter/Madam incident is unclear. Maybe she figured it was so long ago nobody could disprove her claim. But it really isn't that difficult. There's this, and there's this, and then there's this, just to name a few. And that's not even counting the newsmutt's own posts (mis)describing various Vitter/Madam discussions on Fox. Is Ellen claiming she doesn't even see the articles on her own site?!?" 
---------------------- 
 
Now, if you click on all his links to Fox discussing Vitters, the first has a very small segment where they're defending his wife for saying it's a personal matter. The next 2 just mentions Vitters name being on the DC Madam's list and that's it. 
 
Why does Dollar lie so much? 
Posted by: john t on Sun 3.15 6:21pm 
=-=-=
Did you even read that vstol? What Ellen was saying is Fox never had a lengthy discussion on Vitters being on the DC Madams list or about his airport tirade. Everything you or Dollar has brought up turns into a Democratic bashing section. Now either show something where they strictly talk about Vitters or STFU about it. Maybe you should go back and read what Ellen asked you on the thread in the mains. Posted by: john t on Sun 3.15 10:34pm 
=-=-=-=
See my Posted by: vstol on Sun 3.15 11:17pm (before it's purged) that was followed by Ellen's entry into the fray:
 
vstol, 
Just like J$, you twisted what I said. To repeat, for the last time: I said that HANNITY GAVE VITTER A PASS ON THE AIRPORT INCIDENT AND THE DC MADAM THING THAT NIGHT. I further noted that there had been no DISCUSSION (different from a brief report or even a news report) ON VITTER'S AIRPORT INCIDENT and then compared that to THE HEAVY DISCUSSION ABOUT CYNTHIA MCKINNEY'S BRIEF TO-DO. I NEVER SAID THERE WAS NO REPORT ON FOX NEWS ABOUT VITTER'S AIRPORT INCIDENT NOR THE DC MADAM INCIDENT. Yet somehow J$ got it all twisted and cited something I never said to claim that I lied. How typical. ***You have proved that you are not here in good faith. Please leave now or I am going to ban you.*** Posted by: Ellen on Sun 3.15 11:23pm 
=-=-=-=
Five days later, a follow up by Ellen:
 
I just banned vstol in the forum a night or two ago. I had asked him to leave, as he was obviously here in bad faith, and, proving my point, he stuck around anyway. He can post on the mains, if he remains respectful, as far as I'm concerned (if a mod wants to delete him, that's his or her choice) but it's pretty clear he's not here for dialogue but to aid and abet the smearing of us over at J$. So why should he be allowed in the forum where his only purpose is to goad us into something J$ can later use to smear us? 
Posted by: Ellen on Fri 3.20 10:14am 
=-=-=-=
And just what did I do to prove her point? I stayed off the Forum untill I was personally attacked with a lie:
 
Imagine that! vistol is accusing "Haggis" of doing what vistol does here ALL THE TIME. vistol is the master at "starting an argument about quotes and semantics that would eventually lead to far off worlds." I've seen vistol nitpick over a misplaced comma. _Posted by: Visitor55 on Thu 3.19 5:07pm 
=-=-=-=
Oh, one other thing I did. After Ellen threatened me with being banned if I didn't leave, I responded with:
 
OK Ellen. I do have one question. What's the difference between being forced to leave or being banned?
Posted by: vstol on Sun 3.15 11:29pm 
 
That comment was PURGED within minutes.BTW, a few days later, I was banned from all comment threads on the Mains.
 
There's a name for people who rewrite history. It's on the tip of my tongue, but I just can't remember what it is.
 
http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=26518&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=330
April 10, 2009, 5:11:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
What was Grammie being called a liar about?
 
It's so bizarre!
April 10, 2009, 5:49:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Grammie said here that people over there thought she was really a 40-year-old man. They descended on her and called her names, said she was lying, etc. Then Grammie found the post where Claudo (Ellen?) said it. But when she posted that proof, Ellen deleted it.
April 10, 2009, 5:52:18 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Cecelia
How would they know what Grammie had or had not been called by someone over there at one time or another?
April 10, 2009, 6:07:18 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well, it was in the very same thread where the current discussion was going on, just a week or so earlier. It's entirely possible that they knew, but just called Grammie a liar for the sport of it. If you've had any dealing with john t, you understand how that works.
April 10, 2009, 6:10:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply


vstol
I haven't taken the time to fact-check all of your criticisms , but this one caught my eye because it seemed so astonishing - "Item: The birth of Christ dismissed as just so much "nonsense"- so I looked it up. Surprise, surprise: what was being dismissed as "nonsense" was the annual "culture war" meme that Christianity in general, and Christmas in particular, is "under attack" and that everyone should say Merry Christmas whether they are believers or not.
In your hurry to "prove" how "anti-Christian" Newshounds is, you sure got that one wrong. 
Pegleg Peggy | Homepage | 04.05.09 - 4:32 pm 
 
You want to pick on the 'birth of Christ' comment by doing some fancy spinning about what the writer really meant (i.e. parsing). I think your argument there is silly but I also think it's designed to distract from other points that you have steadfastly avoided. Just like saying it doesn't represent Priscilla's stance--straw man! I never said it did!-J$ 04.06.09 - 9:51 am 
~~~~~
 
I also think it's designed to distract from other points that you have steadfastly avoided. 
 
I'm not done yet!  -Peg
~~~~~~~~~~~
 
PS: I note another criticism you have:
"I pointed out exactly where Dollar was lying.... [vulgarity deleted]"
I must have missed that, so please be specific and point to where I was "lying".
 
What gets said in a tiny little corner of the NH O/T stays in a tiny little corner of the NH O/T! 
 
OTTOMH I can't remember what I was referring to, I'll have a look and get back to you later.
 
Pegleg Peggy | Homepage | 04.06.09 - 11:42 am | # 
=-=-=-=
Just how many pending unfinished, get back to you later issues can someone have and still bring up new issues?
April 10, 2009, 7:33:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
I think I found Michael Weston's new alias. Check out this new poster who, in a search of the forum, has only posted on the NH J$ OT thread(interjections by FF):
 
---------------------------------------------
 
"Tr, in my humble opinion (here's David trying to look meek to hide his ID), I believe that Johnny Dollars Place in (sic) really no different than Fox News, still upset from losing the election in November. (ding!)
I can remember (from when, brand new NH poster?) a poster named Ashley saying that Mrs. Palin was smeared by the media and that was some of the reason that McCain lost the election. 
The criticism of Palin was deserved, she was unqualified, unethical, slanderous, and most of all exploitive of her family. (ding!)
 
Am I sure in her (ding!) (Ashley) mind Palin was smeared, even her (ding!) own network(Fox) threw he (sic) under the bus after the election loss. How soon Fox News forgot that Palin was their gold star and then a couple of month (sic) later they treated her (except for Van Sustren (sic), who we all know husbands (sic) is working for Palin, and Hannity, who worships any Republican with a pulse) (ding!) like cow manure (ding!). How the tide did turn on Queen Palin."
 
Posted by: David Troyer on Fri 4.10 9:37am
 
---------------------------------------------
 
Hi Patrick!
April 10, 2009, 9:47:05 PM EDT – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Mr. Troyer, my inclination tells me it is you.
Posted by: Captain America on Fri 4.10 10:44pm
 
---------------------------------------------
 
Captain America also sees Patrick in this new poster DT. DT claims to read J$P and reports back on it on the NH J$ OT thread. Just like MW. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
April 10, 2009, 11:56:52 PM EDT – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Shortly after Patrick/Weston got booted from the NH OT forum, he tried posting here. He adopted a couple of names, one of them "Glenn Beck Fan", and wanted to post some really peculiar idea about what a Glenn Beck fan would say about tea parties. It wouldn't have gotten thru anyhow because it was totally political, but a quick IP check showed it coming straight from Patrick's home town.
 
I have no doubt that when he was unable to penetrate the high-security firewalls of J$P that he was reduced to adopting a new persona and re-upping at NH.
April 11, 2009, 12:10:06 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Blackflon
Thanks, Angie! It was a pleasure... and I'm always up for plugging civil discourse.
Ellen | Homepage | 04.11.09 - 12:49 am | # 
 
You all can stop laughing now.
April 11, 2009, 8:23:52 AM EDT – Like – Reply


Ashley
johnny dollar | Homepage | 04.11.09 - 12:15 am | #
 
You, FF, and Cecelia are absolutely correct, Troyer is the l'il feller. After just reading his posts over at Basset Central, there is no doubt. Interesting how "David" signs up at the hounds on 4/9/09 the same day that the l'il feller is bounced. What a coincidence!!!!
 
It's definitely the little one. No doubt. 
 
By the way, Cecelia is simply on fire over there!! Grammie too the other day. I am impressed. Those folks over there have no idea what they are dealing with. I'm so glad that C and G are on our side.
April 11, 2009, 11:10:38 AM EDT – Like – Reply