Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Joined
·
28,829 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,950 Posts
My new roommate told me the other night that the reason we cannot see Obama's birth certificate is because it gives his race as Caucasian. He went on to describe how bad it would look that Obama has "played the race card" so successfully when his birth record says he's a white guy.

Anybody got any other roommate horror stories?
 

·
Registered
'74 & '78 450 SEL
Joined
·
9,145 Posts
Did you really start a thread to call attention to the fact that World Net Daily ran a kook conspiracy story about Obama's birth certificate? "Hey, everyone, it's possible the people at WND may not be entirely stable."






Not entirely stable? I'm glad you're here to tell us these things.
 

·
Registered
Euro 1985 500SEL
Joined
·
1,498 Posts
Of course, their standards aren't quite as high as the other networks. . . .
You do realize Dan Rather was vindicated for what he reported on Bush don't you? The man had a wonderful career, and one little hiccup doesn't justify marring his entire prestigious career. And if Dan Rather is the only thing you can hold up to prove the major networks are as deluded as Fox..that is a very poor example indeed.
 

·
Registered
1998 Mercedes E320 Sedan 4Matic
Joined
·
332 Posts
You do realize Dan Rather was vindicated for what he reported on Bush don't you?
no he wasn't. documents were fake. it is no more a "hickup" for a journalist to knowingly present fake documents, then it's a "hickup" for a cop to be caught dealing drugs.
 

·
Registered
'74 & '78 450 SEL
Joined
·
9,145 Posts
You do realize Dan Rather was vindicated for what he reported on Bush don't you?
Vindicated? Okay, against my better judgment I'll bite on this and ask you to show me some evidence that vindicates Dan Rather in his 60 minutes story about Bush's guard duty.



The man had a wonderful career, and one little hiccup doesn't justify marring his entire prestigious career. And if Dan Rather is the only thing you can hold up to prove the major networks are as deluded as Fox..that is a very poor example indeed.

Sorry but this always happens. The bash FoxNews robots pop up in about every third thread and it's so pathetic considering how objective studies of the media consistently show that FoxNews is no more biased, no less accurate and has virtually the same standards of journalism and ethics as the other major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN).

Yet the only thing that matters to the Fox haters is a few cherry picked anecdotes of mistakes, exaggerated to make them seem more egregious and more common than they are while any mistakes at other networks are downplayed to make them seem less important and so rare as to be inconsequential.

It all comes down to supporting your team and most consumers of news pick the source that fits their views (and hate the ones which don't).
 

·
Registered
Euro 1985 500SEL
Joined
·
1,498 Posts
I don't need a study to tell me Fox news slanders and is pure right wing propaganda. All you have to do is turn it on and listen to all the BS coming from them and their commentators like O'Reilly.

As for Rather..he was vindicated because he did not knowingly present fake documents and admitted he made a mistake. He said the following:

"We are told [the documents] were taken from Lieutenant Colonel Killian’s personal files" and incorrectly asserted that "the material" had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS."

"if I knew then what I know now – I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question,"

And CBS News President Andrew Heyward said, "Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."

You are implying Rather knew the documents were fake and chose to deceive the american people, which is incorrect. Also, just as the documents could not be proven to be authentic, they also could not be proven to be fake. Or as was stated:

"No forensic document examiners or typography experts have authenticated the documents, and this may not be technically possible without original documents."
 

·
Registered
1998 Mercedes E320 Sedan 4Matic
Joined
·
332 Posts
You are implying Rather knew the documents were fake and chose to deceive the american people, which is incorrect. Also, just as the documents could not be proven to be authentic, they also could not be proven to be fake.
and yet, it took 5 minutes to random computer literate folks on internet to take one look at these documents and see that they are typed in Microsoft Word, not on old typewriter.

so you are saying that dan rather is an idiot rather than a liar? not very likely for man with his career.

his second lie was when, after being challenged, he continued to insist that he personally checked that the documents are genuine.
 

·
Registered
'74 & '78 450 SEL
Joined
·
9,145 Posts
I don't need a study to tell me Fox news slanders and is pure right wing propaganda. All you have to do is turn it on and listen to all the BS coming from them and their commentators like O'Reilly.
That's what I thought. You don't care about the objective evidence. On the occasions where you need to re-validate your hatred for Fox you can always turn on O'Reilly (who isn't even a news journalist but an acknowledged partisan commentator) and find something he says that you can disagree with (thus proving to yourself how much Fox lies).




As for Rather..he was vindicated because he did not knowingly present fake documents and admitted he made a mistake. He said the following:

"We are told [the documents] were taken from Lieutenant Colonel Killian’s personal files" and incorrectly asserted that "the material" had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS."

"if I knew then what I know now – I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question,"

And CBS News President Andrew Heyward said, "Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report. We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."
If this were true, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt and excuse him for his "mistake" But it isn't true. Dan Rather (and other senior members of his editorial staff) purposely bypassed important (and basic) rules of ethics that any Journalism 101 student knows not to disregard.

Specifically, when one is presented with documents of questionable provenance and authenticity it is necessary to take steps to authenticate them. In this case, the documents were presented to 2 independent experts (hired by CBS for this purpose) and both experts noted numerous problems with the documents which led them each to consider the documents lacked credibility and both recommended that CBS not use them and not consider them authentic.


Here's where the ethics violations occurred:

-They used the documents as sole evidence in a news story of a major scandal involving the president of the United States a short time before an election knowing the documents were of questionable authenticity and provenance.

-They presented the documents as authenticated when they knew their own hired experts refused to authenticate them.

-Once the documents were under question, they falsely reported that the documents were authenticated by their experts thus attempting to pass the blame to those parties.

-Even after acknowledging problems with the documents, they continued to insist the story itself was true in spite of the fact that the documents were the only evidence at all in support of the story.

-Their belated "apology" wasn't a genuine apology for the numerous violations of journalistic ethics they knowingly engaged in but were really just the typical, "Mistakes were made and we regret the incident" excuse.






You are implying Rather knew the documents were fake and chose to deceive the american people, which is incorrect.
I'm not implying it, I'm saying it - He knew they were probably fake and he certainly knew it was a violation of journalistic ethics to run the story. Dan Rather is an intelligent and capable journalist and he knows the rules and he understands how information like this is supposed to be handled. He chose to use the bogus documents anyway because he has been, for decades, a partisan supporter of Democrats and Democratic causes and he saw an opportunity to take out a Republican candidate for president and help elect a Democrat.

How anyone can believe that a news anchor who makes a living on the side by speaking at Democratic fundraisers and advocating Democratic polices can be an objective and unbiased journalist in his main job as news anchor is beyond me to understand. It's just self delusion to believe it's possible.

Also, just as the documents could not be proven to be authentic, they also could not be proven to be fake. Or as was stated:

"No forensic document examiners or typography experts have authenticated the documents, and this may not be technically possible without original documents."
This is the easy part. The documents are PROVED FORGERIES

Here is how:

1) The documents are in a proportionally spaced font

2) All typewriters of the time the documents were supposed to have been created used mono-spaced fonts and were incapable of creating a document in proportionally spaced font. Computer based word processors are generally required for this (with a few specialized exceptions that were only available during the 1980's).

3) While it is theoretically possible for specialized equipment to have manually created such documents at the time, it is beyond implausible that they would have been used to by a clerk in the military to create simple memos to file. And even if this problem could be overcome it wouldn't explain why every other document of its type is in a mono-spaced font

4) This one is the icing on the cake. If you opened up the current version of Microsoft Word at the time of the CBS story you would find that the default setting of font and size will allow you to type the exact same document yourself. Every word, every line and every space matches up perfectly with the CBS documents. All you need to do is print it out and then run it through a copier three or four times to make it look "old".

Points 1-4 were all made within two hours of the CBS segment airing and were accomplished by people on discussion forums sitting at home in their PJ's. The new media - playing watchdog to the old media.


Interesting take on this from NPR:
Dan Rather Hopes To Tell His Bush Story In Court : NPR




And since we're deciding which news network is the one most full of lies by using only anecdotal information then I will nominate CBS solely because of the Dan Rather/forged memo scandal. Unless someone can come up with an anecdote to top that cluster**** of a story then it's pretty much decided - CBS is the worst.
 

·
Forum Administrator , RC Colas® & Moon Pies®
1981 380SL 151K: 2005 S500 116K
Joined
·
39,185 Posts
...
And since we're deciding which news network is the one most full of lies by using only anecdotal information then I will nominate CBS solely because of the Dan Rather/forged memo scandal. Unless someone can come up with an anecdote to top that cluster**** of a story then it's pretty much decided - CBS is the worst.
G.M. Resumes Its Advertising On NBC News - NYTimes.com
 

·
Surely A Large Human
MB Regretmobile
Joined
·
35,725 Posts
Sorry but this always happens. The bash FoxNews robots pop up in about every third thread and it's so pathetic considering how objective studies of the media consistently show that FoxNews is no more biased, no less accurate and has virtually the same standards of journalism and ethics as the other major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN).

Yet the only thing that matters to the Fox haters is a few cherry picked anecdotes of mistakes, exaggerated to make them seem more egregious and more common than they are while any mistakes at other networks are downplayed to make them seem less important and so rare as to be inconsequential.

It all comes down to supporting your team and most consumers of news pick the source that fits their views (and hate the ones which don't).
The other thing that happens is that when one side gets (correctly) criticized for something hypocritical or awful that people carrying their banner have done, they immediately search for examples of how the other side has done something they consider similarly hypocritical or awful. Nobody actually takes responsibility for anything. Nobody acknowledges that the standard of "no worse than the other guy" isn't good enough. Everybody thinks it's a sign of weakness to call out someone on your own team. It's fucking nauseating.
 

·
Registered
83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Joined
·
28,829 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
My new roommate told me the other night that the reason we cannot see Obama's birth certificate is because it gives his race as Caucasian. He went on to describe how bad it would look that Obama has "played the race card" so successfully when his birth record says he's a white guy.

Anybody got any other roommate horror stories?
The more obvious explanation is that Obama's mother and father were not married when he was born. Birth Certificates are medical records, and medical records are your own business and nobody else's. The Constitution requires place and date of birth, nothing more, nothing less, so any form of birth document that proves that a record for your birth exists in your state's Vital Records database is all he ever needed, and no one has a right to pry into his private life for anything more.
 

·
Registered
83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Joined
·
28,829 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Look at the right wing morons on this thread ranting about the gone and forgotten Dan Rather, so they don't have to admit the embarrassing truth of the OP, that they are routinely fed lies by their right wing media, which they then regurgitate on command.

Rather himself did not forge the documents, his fault was in not checking them out before he proclaimed them true.
 

·
Registered
72 Pinto
Joined
·
6,527 Posts
The other thing that happens is that when one side gets (correctly) criticized for something hypocritical or awful that people carrying their banner have done, they immediately search for examples of how the other side has done something they consider similarly hypocritical or awful. Nobody actually takes responsibility for anything. Nobody acknowledges that the standard of "no worse than the other guy" isn't good enough. Everybody thinks it's a sign of weakness to call out someone on your own team. It's fucking nauseating.
Absolutely correct! Hence all the "Bush did it first" comments that were so predictable in Obama's first two years. Of course I'm sure you never did that.
 

·
Registered
'74 & '78 450 SEL
Joined
·
9,145 Posts
The other thing that happens is that when one side gets (correctly) criticized for something hypocritical or awful that people carrying their banner have done, they immediately search for examples of how the other side has done something they consider similarly hypocritical or awful. Nobody actually takes responsibility for anything. Nobody acknowledges that the standard of "no worse than the other guy" isn't good enough. Everybody thinks it's a sign of weakness to call out someone on your own team. It's fucking nauseating.

I agree. I find the news coverage from all the networks to be atrocious at the national level. Any news I get from any source is treated with the same skeptical approach - assume it may be biased or slanted and verify everything independently, where possible.
 

·
Registered
'74 & '78 450 SEL
Joined
·
9,145 Posts
Look at the right wing morons on this thread ranting about the gone and forgotten Dan Rather, so they don't have to admit the embarrassing truth of the OP, that they are routinely fed lies by their right wing media, which they then regurgitate on command.

Rather himself did not forge the documents, his fault was in not checking them out before he proclaimed them true.
Wow, more name calling in place of rational statements.

In case you were actually interested in discussing the "truth of the OP" how about addressing the specific criticisms against the Fairness Doctrine that have already been raised in this thread.

Would you care to express a response to the charge that there is no longer a need for the Fairness Doctrine because in the year 2011 there is plenty of room on the airwaves for all points of view and all opinions are fairly represented? Can you refute the claim by citing specific examples where the liberal/progressive viewpoint isn't available to listeners or isn't being adequately represented?

This is your thread and it's your obligation to provide some kind of evidence for your claims. Name-calling and fallacies of distraction aren't going to cut it.
 

·
Banned
2007 E350 4Matic P2; 2008 GL320 CDI P2
Joined
·
20,153 Posts
Wow, more name calling in place of rational statements.

In case you were actually interested in discussing the "truth of the OP" how about addressing the specific criticisms against the Fairness Doctrine that have already been raised in this thread.
He can't do that!
It would take the ability to read the entire thread, and since he puts anyone who he disagrees with on ignore, he has missed at least some of the specific criticisms.

This is your thread and it's your obligation to provide some kind of evidence for your claims. Name-calling and fallacies of distraction aren't going to cut it.
Yes, it is "HIS" thread. Now move along before you join the ranks of the ignored.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top