3/7/09 12:51 AM

New Lies? Same As the Old Lies!

Updated! They're up to their old tricks again. We're talking about the newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed syndicate). Sometimes their duplicity is laughable in its transparency. The truth becomes fungible, ever-changing in order to achieve their goal to smear Fox News.

Recall Michael Vick? When the story first broke, Michelle Malkin dared to hesitate before declaring him ready for the lynch mob, and the newsmutts were outraged:

Malkin chose to side with Michael Vick and attack PETA simply because it's erroneously labeled a left wing organization.... I didn't get the impression that Malkin cared about dogs too much. Anyone who likes dogs even slightly has to be disgusted and infuriated by this situation. Even if Michael Vick claims he never visted his own property and knew nothing about the atrocities, he still deserves to face consequences.

Just three days later, when Megyn Kelly dared to suggest (accurately) that the case against him was strong, the Fox haters had to find a way to smear her, even if it meant completely reversing their position of just 72 hours earlier:
Kelly has evidently decided that her superior legal judgment once again obviates the necessity to wait for a trial to arrive at a verdict. But in the Michael Vick case, it’s a guilty verdict... This post is not about Vick or whether he is guilty or innocent but about the way that FOX News and Megyn Kelly thumb their nose at our legal system.

Pretty dramatic turnaround eh? Such acrobatics are required when you are a Fox hater. Just ask Mike Huckabee. Three days ago, the newspoodles bemoaned how FNC kept fawning over Huckabee, saying the coverage was "kind, glowing even, with little attention paid to his extremist positions". Of course this comes after insisting Fox was "smearing" Huckabee, was "scared" of Huckabee, and keeps " attacking " him. So which is it? It doesn't matter. Reality is malleable in the kennel.

But you can only stretch reality so much before it snaps completely into a bald-faced untruth. For that we turn to Chrish, a veritable Old Faithful of falsehoods and lies. This time she focuses on a report about administration "lies" regarding Iraq, asserting that foxnews.com "apparently not finding it worthy of the bytes required to even report it". She added that "the only reference to the study on the FOX website was a few paragraphs ("Crying Wolf?") on the "Special Report" Grapevine", then moved in for the kill:
So we are to believe that the 600+ outlets that published articles about the study are the liberal media, and FOX, a major "news" network who didn't report the news, is the sole "fair and balanced" source. In other words, NOT reporting the news when it is detrimental to your cause is not bias, reporting news regardless of its political impact IS.

As is so often the case, there is only one thing wrong with this latest newspooch scoop: it ain't true. The full-page report on this story is sitting right there on foxnews.com, where it has been for nearly a day and a half. In fact, there was a link to it in our right hand column for most of yesterday (Jan 23) since it was one of the top headlines distributed in the foxnews.com RSS feed. And today, over 30 hours after the story broke, and nearly 12 hours after Chrish insisted that foxnews.com spiked the report, it's still a headline on the website. It's moved down the list since yesterday as new stories came in, but there it is:


Don't bother trying to tell the biased bassets what you think of this latest smear job. For this entry they've removed the ability to post comments. Of course you could email them, but, unlike comments, emails are not public. Very convenient.

Update: After this article caught the mastiffs in yet another whopper, Chrish moved quickly into damage control mode. Her new post admits that foxnews.com did report the story (but no apology, and no correction to the earlier post that got it wrong). But she brushes aside all her falsehoods because the story was "buried" by foxnews.com. Err, make that "dismissed, ignored, buried".

Another lie. As noted above, it was a headline on the politics page for a day and a half. What's more, foxnews.com published a second story the next day. And then there's this:


How can a report that is one of the day's most-read stories possibly have been "buried"? It couldn't. It's just another hound lie.




Jeff
It's amazing how many people hate FOX news. In reality, they are the best news station on cable and their ratings prove it.
January 25, 2008, 1:55:45 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Because I used to be a "guest bloggers" for Newshounds, I know how they will view the proof you provided that Fox News was running the story. 
 
They claim many, many stories appear on the Fox News. com website, but never make it to the TV news shows.
 
Now I have no idea whether this particular story was aired on Fox News TV, but I do know that is the crititeria NH goes by. 
 
I offer this simply as a way of explaining the NH position and not not to get into an argument over who is right and who is wrong.
January 25, 2008, 4:53:03 AM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
BC: Um don't be a coward and hide behind NH's skirt.. You've made the very charge you attribute to them many many times yourself.
January 25, 2008, 8:10:52 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Vince P. The truth of the matter is very few of the stories about Iraq which appear on the Fox News website ever make it to the TV newscast. Fox News TV is much too busy reporting on the latest about Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan. drumming up racial hatred using Bill Clinton as the foil, and endless reports on Drew Peterson. 
 
When a news organization is owned by a guy like Rupert Murcdoch who made his milloions selling super market tabloids you can expect the news division of Fox News TV to follow the same forumla and report only what any other news organization would consider tabloid news and left to their entertainment division but not their news division. 
 
So I'm not hiding behind the skirts of anyone. I'm telling it like it is and if you or Johnny Dollar want to challenge me then put up links to all the TV NEWS accounts FOX NEWS has run on the Iraq war in the last few weeks or a month. 
 
It is a total copout to say the Fox News website ran the story about Iraq when the TV News division fails to report it.
 
That is why I started by own blog because the American public are getting the shaft from so-called news organizations like Fox News who will come up with anything to avoid telling the truth about Iraq. 
 
Go to my website and look at the lead story and if you can say the "surge": is a roaring success in Iraq then I think you need a course in reading comprehension.
January 25, 2008, 9:04:41 AM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
I hope all of the American Public goes to your site and appreciates just who today's "Progressives" really are.
January 25, 2008, 10:00:37 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Tell me this, Vince. Do you think it is right for Fox News to ignore the violence and death that continues in Iraq when we have 160,000 troops deployed to Iraq? 
 
"Progressive, Liberal or Conservative" has nothing to do with it. It is the decent thing to do when your country is engaged in a war. 
 
Fox News has always looked for anything to avoid reporting on the war, and to say they put it on their website is a copout. How many people turn to Fox News TV for their new as compared to how many who go to the website for news? You know and I know the bulk of the people getting information from Fox News rely on the TV division to bring them their news and not a website. 
 
Again, the reason I started my blog devoted entirely to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is because so-called news organization like Fox News have let our troops and the families down by not reporting on the events I report on my blog.
January 25, 2008, 10:07:44 AM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
"I'm telling it like it is and if you or Johnny Dollar want to challenge me then put up links to all the TV NEWS accounts FOX NEWS has run on the Iraq war in the last few weeks or a month."
 
Bill, that is a dandy challenge but how does one go about putting up a link to undocumented (except internally to FNC) segments of programs and bottom-of-the-hour/TOTH snippets? Fox hardly ignores the war including the deaths (which are almost as frequent here in Detroit as they are in Iraq) but your challenge will go unanswered because there isn't a good way to prove you wrong. You probably already knew that, and to support your false claim you extended an impossible challenge.
January 25, 2008, 10:25:54 AM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
> I have no idea whether this particular story was aired on Fox News TV, but I do know that is the crititeria NH goes by. 
 
That's true, but their article said nothing about television. It was ALL about the foxnews.com website. First they claimed there was no story there. It turns out there was. In fact there were two. Then they shifted the goal posts and claimed that the story was there but "buried". Only it was a headline for over a day and a half and one of the day's most-read stories. So much for it being "buried".
 
I know it was covered on the tv side because I saw it, but they never even raised that question.
January 25, 2008, 1:28:20 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Fox Fan: I watch a lot of Fox News and I can't remember the last time they mentioned the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq. I listed them in my blog so it should be something Fox News could easily check and cover. 
 
Also, I hope you are not trying to compare deaths in Detroit to deaths in a war zone. That is a nonsequitur. 
 
That is like saying more people have died on the highways in the U.S. in one week than have died in the war in Iraq.
 
It doesn't make sense and is patently absurd to compare the two. 
 
Highway fatalities are caused by someone making a mistake while driving. 
 
Deaths of American troops in Iraq are done deliberately by the enemy. 
 
You are mixing apples and oranges.
 
Now it is time for me to go and add the number of deaths happening in Iraq to my blog. Deaths and violence which Fox News no longer covers.
January 25, 2008, 1:33:53 PM EST – Like – Reply


NChomsky
Check out Newshounds now. No commenting allowed on all posts made by one poster, who has almost all the posts. The site is dead.
January 25, 2008, 9:04:08 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Bill, I'll admit that Detroit/Iraq was a bad comparison (even if the two do have some serious war zones). Granted, I live in the suburbs and nowhere near those areas. However, you didn't address the other point of my comment- your challenge to post a link to a TV program or segment was pointless. 
 
Allow me to point this out- this site is truly fair and balanced! Your opinions are challenged yet appreciated.
January 25, 2008, 10:15:47 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Bill, I hope you caught O'Reilly tonight. Laura Ingrahm hosted, and about 40 minutes into the broadcast she listed some of the January deaths in Iraq by name and displayed the list as she read them.
January 25, 2008, 10:50:58 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
To NChomsky: I took a glance at NH and noticed the same thing. It looks like only one person is doing th posting and they are getting very few comments. Websites like NH are an outgrowth of the Iraq war and when you no longer cover the Iraq war there is no need for your existence. Much like Fox News. 
 
Fox Fan says Laura Ingraham mentioned GIs killed in Iraq, but Laura Ingraham is a maverick and nto a regular host at Fox News and hs ehas openly expressed on Fox how she hates how Fox devotes so much of their programming to sex topics. 
 
I'm sure she agreed to fill in for O'Reilly ONLY if she could show the war dead pictures and names. It will be back to the usual sex stuff when O'Reilly returns. 
 
You can take it to the bank.
January 26, 2008, 2:18:40 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
There appears to be big trouble at NH.
 
Check out this off topic post titled:
"Why Not Just Shut the Damn Blog Down."
 
http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=19800&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=6451c9031a7125f29bf60fd947e46e0f
 
My own personal experience is one person, who has posted on this site in an attempt to say they "fired" me, is the cause of the ALL the problems at NH. 
 
She runs the site with an iron fist and many of the moderators are fighting with her, and two have already quit. 
 
I just completed a full-scale invesigation with Yahoo when someone from NH said I was making disparaging remarks on their site and they posted a comment about me using a phony Yahoo e-mail address in my name. Not only that, but they reported me to my server. 
 
Yahoo determined it was not me who made the comments and took action, although company policy prohibits them from telling me what they did. 
 
It is one thing to have a difference of opinion with a guest blogger like myself, but when you go so far as to steal someone's identity and then try to get them in trouble with their server, you have crossed the line.
 
The person who did this to me crossed that line and thanks to Yahoo's investigative department the culprit has been found out and steps are now being taken against the perpetrator of the hoaxe. 
 
Incidentally, I never use Yahoo for e-mails so it was apparent right from the start the attack on me was done by someone who wanted to get even with me for quitting NH as a guest blogger.
 
I now have my own blog where I'm free to post the real truth about what is going on in Iraq and as I point out daily the conditions on the ground in Iraq are NOT what you are hearing from the mainstream media. 
 
If you read the link I furnished you will see one of the mods at NH complains about how they are not getting along with another mod.
 
Guess who that mod would be.
January 26, 2008, 3:25:11 AM EST – Like – Reply


NChomsky
Guess who that mod would be.
Bill Corcoran | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 3:30 am 
Chrish has killed the site. Seems a bit strange that a person that is so worked up about a troll making fun of a death, that it devastated her, is the one posting ALL THE POSTS, does it not? "oh you all have really upset me.so much that I only have 6 posts today".......Bullcrap. The regulars are angry.
January 26, 2008, 10:01:44 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
NChomsky: I will have to go take a look at what is happening on NH. I know there is a lot of internal fighting going on. The problem as I see it is these people take themselves way too seriously. 
 
I know of at least ten people who no longer post on the NH site because of the way I was treated. They have told me so via my own blog listed here. 
 
Thanks for keeping me updated on what is happening via Johnny Dollars site. Hope you don't mind, Johnny, but it is along the lines of the topic you posted.
January 26, 2008, 11:17:53 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
NChomsky: I will have to go take a look at what is happening on NH. I know there is a lot of internal fighting going on. The problem as I see it is these people take themselves way too seriously. 
 
I know of at least ten people who no longer post on the NH site because of the way I was treated. They have told me so via my own blog listed here. 
 
Thanks for keeping me updated on what is happening via Johnny Dollars site. Hope you don't mind, Johnny, but it is along the lines of the topic you posted.
January 26, 2008, 11:17:53 AM EST – Like – Reply


NChomsky
Bill: is doing stuff like this legal for a site to do?
 
Anti-Newshound IP address
67.33.170.142
 
Anti,
Maybe you didn't see my note to you on my other thread but I am having your IP addresses traced. A troll sock puppet who, coincidentally, also used Bell South, traced to a company that has something medical in its name.
 
If you don't leave now and leave for good, I am going to write them and let them know what one of their employees (probably someone in the IT department) is doing on their system.
 
This is my final warning to you.
Ellen | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 11:39 am 
 
Putting someone's private info online without permission? Is it legal? Bill? Johnny maybe you know? I'm sure curious if that site is imploding or what. I always enjoyed going there when you were there Bill, now not so much at all. All my posts get deleted, usually within minutes.
January 26, 2008, 12:10:59 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Interesting question, legally speaking. Probably on its face she can reveal an IP address if she wants to, but her purpose for doing so may raise some red flags. If she puts it out, and then adds other extraneous data (like the medical company) it's treading mighty close to violating privacy.
 
Ellen's "I'm going to write your mommy and tell her what you're doing" threats are nothing new. I can't tell you how many times she has threatened to file a complaint with my ISP for "harrassment" because I posted in one of the NH comments threads. Not for any inappropriate content, but just for posting! I've been waiting for it to happen, because there are a whole range of legal remedies for tortious interference, harrassment, that I'd love to present to her attorney. And I don't settle cases. I win them.
January 26, 2008, 12:25:29 PM EST – Like – Reply


NChomsky
Thanks for the info Johnny. I've tried to post comments on the site, but they are deleted within minutes, and I am a supposed NH member!!!!!!! Something smells badly there. Ellen et al, are sticking their fingers in their ears when you ask questions, then delete you. I think the site is dead and only a matter of time before gone.
January 26, 2008, 12:28:17 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
NChomsky and Johnny Dollar.
 
No, I didn't see what you said Ellen is saying abot me, but this is just another case of someone stealing my identity and posting messages, or trying to post messages, on the NH site. 
 
Where was this posted on their site?
 
I may have to start a whole investigation of this like I did when someone posted something using a phony Bill Corcoran Yahoo e-mail address and then Ellen sent it to my server (not Yahoo) and tried to get me in trouble. 
 
Thankfully the people at Yahoo tracked it all down and told me it was not me who send the original message and they were going to take action against the thirid party that tried to make it look like I was posting this crap on NH. 
 
Meanwhile, you might be interested in seeing how google is covering me and they have managed to get some NH info that I thought had been deleted.
 
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Bill+Corcoran+Iraq+War&btnG=Google+Search
January 26, 2008, 12:40:51 PM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
I think posting an IP address is not illegal.. IP address is "public" information and one can't expect public information to be made even more public.
 
Threatening to get someone fired if they dont behave a certain way.. is that extortion?
January 26, 2008, 1:15:11 PM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
United States Code 
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 
PART I - CRIMES 
CHAPTER 41 - EXTORTION AND THREATS 
Section 875. Interstate communications 
(d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm,
association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value,
transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication
containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the
addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or
any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two
years, or both.
January 26, 2008, 1:18:49 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
So what are you saying, Vince? If I can prove this was a threat to injure my reputation I could take legal action?
 
All I know is someone is playing games with my name using bogus e-mail addresses and forwarding the information to my server to try and get me in trouble. 
 
If I find out who it is they are going to get an offer they can't refuse. LOL. I heard that line in the Godfather and always liked it. 
 
Seriously, I don't know if you or anyone else reading this has ever been the target of phony e-mails but it is terribly distressing. 
 
Now I know what it is like to be accused of a crime and you had nothing to do with it. 
 
Thanks again, Vince, for the info and thanks to Johnny D for allowing me to air this troubling problem on your excellent site.
January 26, 2008, 2:21:09 PM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
I'm not saying anything.. I dont think its' extortion.. they're not trying to get anything from value from you other than to go away.
January 26, 2008, 2:39:26 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Vince: I have been away since they banned me. I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER go near that site anymore. Also, I'm not sure what Chomsky posted was about me. I may have misread it. 
 
All I know is I'm not involved, nor was I ever involved, with making threatening remarks to NH. 
 
I was advised by my server and Yahoo who supposedly I used to post a message on NH to go to the local police and file a complaint and then let the authorities track it down who is the one who has been doing this to me.
 
If someone keeps this up, I will do just that and I don't live in a little rinky dink town. I live in one of the largest cities in America and I have many, many friends on the police department who would be happy to help find out who is doing this and bust them.
January 26, 2008, 3:37:35 PM EST – Like – Reply


Scott
Well ole billy proved his point about having the most hits at the MUTTS by his deciding to begin posting here. He knows he's a player with words. Make's ole BJ look like an amateur. Taking apart everyone of his lies about and smears of our TROOP'S, which he claims to have been one of, would be a daunting task and he knows it. It's called propaganda! You billy, make claims yet post no links to prove your claims. No one need to prove anything till you prove yourself by linking to something other than American Hating, Troop Hating websites. If you are as you claim ole billy, post a copy of your DD-214. Ole billy is now going to be claiming this site had the most hit's that J$ ever did since he came along. Something sure is beginning to smell and it isn't those Cuban Cigar's Halliburton Soros is fond of.
 
United States Code 
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 
PART I - CRIMES 
CHAPTER 41 - EXTORTION AND THREATS 
Section 875. Interstate communications 
(d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm,
association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value,
transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication
containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the
addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or
any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two
years, or both.
Vince P | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 1:23 pm | # 
 
I guess every blogger is now facing PRISON including you Ole billy for slandering OUR TROOP'S and PRESIDENT. Study deeper on Constitutional Law there Vincey. Start with the 1st Amendment and than dig deep.
January 26, 2008, 4:59:28 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Scott: Why don't you go to my blog and then come back and point out where I failed to provide a link for every story I post. 
 
You and Fox News can't seem to bring yourselves to distinguish between a person reporting on the war and bashing the troops. 
 
I report on what is taking place in Iraq because Fox News and nobody else is doing it anymore.
 
And I don't make it up. It comes from legitimate news organizations and the death count of GIS from the DoD. 
 
I post links to everything I post.
January 26, 2008, 6:00:37 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Bill Corcoran | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 11:22 am | #
 
This truth is it looks like they have cut almost everyone off. Ellen is the only one who allows comments. The only hope I see is going to a registration requirement for the main threads.
 
P.S. The traffic on Sundays is nowhere close to when you were there.
January 26, 2008, 6:50:09 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Thanks TR.
 
I seldom check the site out anymore, but I noticed today that many of the posts had zero comments. That was unheard of when I was a guest blogger for NH. 
 
Ellen has done so much damage to that site that she should be fired. 
 
They will NEVER find a guest blogger like myself who documented everything I posted with links to newspapers and TV outlets around the world. 
 
Keep dropping by my blog http://corksphere.blogspot.com/ where I keep posting the latest from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan no longer covered by the right-wing owned media in the U.S.
 
Speaking of that, do you know there are now only five corporations who own ALL of the media in the U.S.?
 
Here is the link to prove it: Dave Johnson: What Does Corporate Control Of Media Mean? - Media on The Huffington Post
January 26, 2008, 8:00:21 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
That corporate media link didin't work, but this one will:
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-johnson/what-does-corporate-contr_b_83387.html
January 26, 2008, 8:03:04 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Yes I was aware of that, it is a big part of the problem.
 
As for NChomsky, I can't figure out why they are upset with him. I'm just waiting for the day I getted banned (like it will ruin me, lol). You can't have it both ways. Ellen insists you "ignore the trolls". But, how can someone a dialouge with only one person communicating?
January 27, 2008, 2:19:03 AM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Vince P | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 1:20 pm | #
 
In the end, it is up to the employer to mete out punishment if company resources are being abused.
January 27, 2008, 2:52:40 AM EST – Like – Reply


Vince P
Read my 2:44pm comment. 
 
I was just thinking out loud before then.
January 27, 2008, 9:30:34 AM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Bill and TR, where is this vast right wing media conspiracy you speak of? Certainly not at MSNBC, CBS, NYT, or a vast majority of the other media outlets in the US. Just because they're owned by "evil" corporations doesn't make the journalists or producers right wing, reality proves the opposite. 
 
There is ONE cable news outlet that gives both sides of the political spectrum (there should be 3 sides IMO). Otherwise it's "a dialogue with only one person communicating" as TR aptly put it above everywhere you look. 
 
And Scott, please kindly SHUT UP.
January 27, 2008, 1:36:58 PM EST – Like – Reply


Michelle
Bill Corcoran | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 2:23 am
*******************
 
It's official, I am totally disappointed in you Bill.
 
Your statement that NewsHounds was an outgrowth of the occupation of Iraq ia a complete falsehood. But I bet you knew that, huh?
 
You have shown yourself to be perfectly capable of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 
Sad little man.
 
Oh and Mr two cents, your HaloSacn skin sucks.
January 27, 2008, 6:05:01 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
I'll try Neutrogena.
January 27, 2008, 6:21:51 PM EST – Like – Reply


NChomsky
Michelle | 01.27.08 - 6:10 pm 
 
Tell us how you really feel. Hey Ellen! I know you read this (congrats Johnny, they seem to keep track of you, must be fear).......Hey Ellen. You should concentrate on your own site and all it's lies, instead of attacking people that actually used to enjoy it.
 
Sorry Johnny. But when not allowed to post on their site, I found it obvious that they were on yours when they mention your name. Seems to me NH's has a few trolls. Themselves.
January 27, 2008, 6:25:38 PM EST – Like – Reply


pegleg peggy
Bill Corcoran re Newshounds: "I noticed today that many of the posts had zero comments."
 
That's because Chris and Melanie are not allowing comments on their threads at the moment, and the live chat threads during debates get deleted afterwards when they are closed off. The threads that are open for comment have plenty happening, and if you go to the OT you'll see its been very active indeed.
 
Gotta get your facts straight. Just sayin'.
January 27, 2008, 7:32:35 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Hmm. I noticed that most of my comments pointing out their falsehoods detailed in my main post were quickly deleted. What's worse? Allowing comments but selectively deleting the ones that make you look bad? Or just closing them down altogether?
 
It's nice to know that the hounds are still reading J$P place, however:
 
http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=19873
January 27, 2008, 7:47:52 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Fox Fan | 01.27.08 - 1:41 pm | #
Maybe I have higher standards. As a kid, I remember LBJ and Nixon getting reamed by the press on Vietnam. Then, Carter got reamed on Iran and the economy. With Reagan, it sort of turned around. Also, this was about the time cable news network came on the scene. After Reagan, you had Bush Sr and Clinton. This was sort of a mixed bag, sometimes they were reamed and other times they were praised. Much of it depended on who was reporting
 
But, now the question is with Bush Jr, why have we not seen this? I'm convinced iraqnam would not have happened if the media had done their collective jobs of asking the tough questions (e.g. What happens AFTER Hussein is out of power or what happens if Bahgdad turns into a insurgent haven?)
January 27, 2008, 8:00:55 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
johnny dollar | Homepage | 01.27.08 - 6:26 pm | #
 
Thanks for letting me post. Some places I'm not allowed to.
January 27, 2008, 8:03:41 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Jeff | Homepage | 01.25.08 - 2:00 am | #
 
Cable is only one branch of the media. To be blunt, I find Fox to be rather poor. The positions of the reporters are so predicable it is silly. I find AP, Reuters, and Yahoo to be far better news sources.
January 27, 2008, 8:06:27 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
So Johnny: How do you like it that many of the "folks" who used to post on NH have followed me over here? 
 
Just doing my part to boost up your "hits" and "page views"
 
I love it how people like Pegleg Peggy said I should go and checkout the OT Forum at NH. I can check it out but they have put a PERMANENT ban on me posting on that forum. So people get to rip into me and all I can do is read about it. Ain't freedom of speech grand?
 
As for the latest, I'm running a lead story on my site about the 965 lies the Bushies told leading up to getting us into war with Iraq. 
 
And, yes, it is documented. 
 
Time to checkout my own stats and see how many "hits" I'm getting from around the world. They may not comment, but the "page views" are going through the roof according to my stat counter. 
 
Gotta luv it.
January 27, 2008, 8:26:28 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Hindsight's 20/20 even in "reporting", isn't it Bill? Of course the 935 lies are documented (what's more, by two research facilities!)- but the basis is still fallacious. It's really two lies that are said in most of the list- WMDs and Saddam/Osama connection. The entire list is really TWO "lies". Then you can get into the "lies" that they are evaluating in the first place- more like worldwide concensus, but you can call it what you like with your right-wing media provided "research".
January 27, 2008, 8:52:25 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
TR | Homepage | 01.27.08 - 8:05 pm | #
 
I wouldn't say you have higher standards for news TR, just different standards from a different generation. It's not really your place to judge higher and lower standards when you really don't know anything about what I watch/browse/listen to except from my moniker.
January 27, 2008, 9:12:09 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Fox Fan | 01.27.08 - 9:17 pm | #
 
Fair enough, but the press has been soft on Bush Jr.
January 27, 2008, 9:18:54 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Michelle | 01.27.08 - 6:10 pm | #
 
Please, the Iraq War has a major impact on almost all the media. From cheerleading at the beginning to ignoring it now. NH is a part of this cycle regardless of what may be claimed. 
 
With Bill, not only was it covered, the Sunday posts were extremely popular in terms of volume. While it is true the number of individuals posting was not large, the volume was tremedous and has not been replaced.
January 27, 2008, 9:24:34 PM EST – Like – Reply


TR
Vince P | Homepage | 01.26.08 - 2:44 pm | #
 
Your right, they only want you off the site. The other way is to freeze out comments.
January 27, 2008, 9:28:19 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Fox Fan: Go back and read the 935 lies. It is more than two. And the Bush administration kept repeating the lies over and over again 
 
In the leas in to the article I listed four or five more times people within Bush administration lied. Cheney was the worst. Even when everyone said nobody from Iraq was involved in 9/11 Cheney kept saying they were.
 
Reading comprehension is a wonderfull skill. You should try it.
January 27, 2008, 10:24:57 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
What I said was that most of the "lies" of the 935 were confirmed as true by multiple agencies of multiple governments at the time. It was not just our government that confirmed them, it was many. It was not just republicans who voted for the war at that time, it was also democrats. The research is based on a misrepresentation of the past.
January 27, 2008, 10:47:49 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
"the Bush administration kept repeating the lies over and over again"
 
Again, you are proving my point. The "research" uses the same material as multiple "lies". If you consider multigovernmental confirmation "lies".
January 27, 2008, 11:00:48 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Congress did NOT give Bush the authority to go to war. They voted for the authority to go to war after all the UN avenues had been explored. Republicans are constantly staying Dems voted for Bush to go to war. No they didn't. They voted for him to continue to investigate the possibility using the UN. He chose to circumvent the UN and now we are in a war that is costing thouands and thousands of lives with no end in sight.
 
I just received info from Pentagon on th latest casuality figures and it is going to blow people's minds. I will be posting a story about it on my blog later this morning. 
 
Remember: This comes from the Pentagon not from a news site.
January 28, 2008, 6:10:44 AM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Clinton and Edwards certainly passed authorization for use of force against Iraq:
 
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237
January 28, 2008, 7:13:34 AM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Only Congress can declare war on a another nation. Bush circumenvented Congress and went to war with Iraq. The vote Clinton and Edwards gave was for authorization to continue negotiations through the UN. They did not give authorization to go to war with Iraq. 
 
I thought everybody knew that.
January 28, 2008, 9:52:11 AM EST – Like – Reply


Vince
>The vote Clinton and Edwards gave was for authorization to continue negotiations through the UN. They did not give authorization to go to war with Iraq. 
 
Bullhockey
January 28, 2008, 1:22:08 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
What part of "A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq" don't you understand Bill?
January 28, 2008, 6:23:53 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
The Library of Congress and the White House official statements both disagree with you Bill. Where are your backed up facts now?
 
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c102:H.J.RES.77:
 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html
 
"Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677";"
 
"Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;
 
Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or harbored such persons or organizations; 
 
Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;"
January 28, 2008, 6:32:42 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Nothing has changed. I see the word CONGRESS used in everything you posted. 
 
In 1941, FDR went before the United States Congress to declare war on Germany and Japan after Pearl Harborn.
 
FDR did NOT act unilaterally. He sought and received the approval for a declaration of war against Germany and Japan.
 
Nothing has changed.
 
Congress declares war on a soveriegn nation, not the President of the United States.
January 29, 2008, 6:42:14 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
I decided to checkout what Ellen's post on NH had to say about Hillary doing an interview on H&C last night. When I went to read the comments (30) of them, this is what is at the top of the comments page:
 
Banned by webmaster. Your comments will not be added
 
Wow! These people really carry a grudge for a long time. I'm banned from making comments on Ellen's post and I'm also banned from the off topic forum on NH. 
 
I'm batting 1,000. LOL.
January 30, 2008, 4:13:39 AM EST – Like – Reply


Vince
FF: Dont you like how Bill just totally ignores what you said and keeps insisting Congress didn't approve of the war?
January 30, 2008, 1:57:45 PM EST – Like – Reply


Bill Corcoran
Congress didn't approve of the war. That is the bottom line. Everything else is double-speak,
January 30, 2008, 9:37:14 PM EST – Like – Reply


Fox Fan
Congress did approve it Bill, check the links. The Senate bipartisanly agreed; Bush is and was in full legal authority. Otherwise, he'd be in jail. You'd have to be nuts to think otherwise.
February 3, 2008, 11:00:12 AM EST – Like – Reply