Or it could be that many in the media including Clark are just not that smart. He is nothing more than a glorified news reader, couldn't find the real story if he tried.

Is there some way for all of us to clip this article and forward it to CTV? ( news@ctv.ca )
I wonder how many such e-mails would cause them to wake up.
Cheers. Eric

Clark's filtering just like you're filtering Kate - you all filter. He filters Biden's mistakes and you filter Palin's mistakes. You're even.

Peter D
If Kate is filtering, how come your post appeared?

Actully, Peter D - there's a difference between Clark and Kate. An enormous difference.

First, could you provide factual evidence of kate's filtering of Palin's comments? Her filtering, not that of commentors.

Second, Clark is a public news broadcaster; he's presenting data to the public. He's paid to provide us with the news. The news, not his opinions. Kate is a private blogger.

Third, blogs are self-correcting. If Kate or anyone presents non-factual data on a blog, a commenter immediately corrects this. This doesn't happen in the authoritarian, one-way communication that is television, radio, newspapers. They present, as gods, in an authoritarian manner.

OK?

*
c'mon, joe biden? don't you know...
he's all about "the science".

*

If Kate is filtering, how come your post appeared?

I never said that Kate filters commentators, but comments made by Palin. How come she didn't say anything about the mistakes Palin made in the debate? Or the mistakes Palin made in the weeks leading up to the debate in her interviews? It's called filtering.

Second, Clark is a public news broadcaster; he's presenting data to the public. He's paid to provide us with the news. The news, not his opinions. Kate is a private blogger.

Yes, I know the difference and that's been Kate's excuse for years - she's not a pro so she doesn't have to do what she criticizes the msm for.

Third, blogs are self-correcting. If Kate or anyone presents non-factual data on a blog...

Which one of you went out of your way to correct Kate about the fact that she didn't talk about Palin's mistakes? Or that she called Plain the clear-cut winner of the debate? Or when she said Biden was too detail obsessed?

All I'm doing is pointing out the inconsistency. If you are going to criticize others for not doing something, then shouldn't you try and do your best not to do that as well?

I wonder if Tom Clark paid for that new suit and expensive overcoat himself..... Perhaps it's not bribery, but just incompetence. That's it, he was out shopping and didn't watch the debate either.

At what point are the people going to wake up to what's being played out in the media across the board in this country?
They're using Banana Republic tactics to influence peoples' choice through filtering and omissions. They're skewing news to manipulate opinion both in the print media and television coming into our homes daily.
Where do we turn to wring their fat necks?

Maybe he's just too stupid to be able to figure it out.

After all, people who can do Math & Science don't go into Journalism.

thank you for pointing this out.

Peter D

You failed to answer question #2.

Peter D:

If we all followed the dictum that we can't possibly criticize others until we've cleaned up our own act, the entire human race would've been mute at least from the time of Jesus of Nazareth (and possibly long before).

It is not my job (nor your job) as a private citizen to be "fair and balanced": that would lead us into an untenable state of paralysis by analysis.  If you're actually planning on voting in this election (regardless of whether it's U.S. or Canada), you're making a choice to filter and overlook the foibles, peccadilloes and general lapses (moral and otherwise) of whichever candidate you're voting for.  In fact, in a democracy, we expect that to happen.

What we don't expect to happen is to have public media, paid for by everyone in the society, to filter specific information so that I cannot even know about all the problems with all the candidates before I go into the voting booth.

That's unacceptable.  It's interfering with my ability and right to know the devil I'm voting for and the devils I'm not voting for.  It's manipulative in ways that the private opinions of a private individual never are.

I don't think you've thought through the full ramifications of this difference.

Garth

It is unnecessary for bloggers to point out Palin's errors since the MSM does a thorough job of it. Now if only the MSM did the same in regards to Biden/Obama.

"How come she didn't say anything about the mistakes Palin made in the debate? "
Peter D:
Kate pointed out the mistakes by Biden.
Now why don't you point out Palin's Mistakes?
If you do, you can bet they won't be filtered.
I've seen Kate take some pretty good shots at people on all sides of the political spectrum.
I hardly call that filtering.

He's a minion. He did his job. He gave cover for Duffy to lie through his teeth to the idiots that still watch CTV, (or Global, for that matter). It's reached the point that we here in darkest Clayville are paying $110. a month for sat prog that gives me approximately 4 hours per day of watchable television, as I refuse to watch most of the pap from the networks, NOT ANY OF THE MSN NEWS EVER! I also don't watch any of the slimy EXTRA! channels you are required to take to get the individual ones you actually want. Then the one you wanted spew crap at you 90% of the time.

My wife still watches a bunch of it, but I'm not allowed in the room, she can't stand my constant bitching, moaning and arm waving.

IanV

Peter D - again, you are setting up a red herring.

The fact that an MSM news station is paid to present us with the news, the factual news, is completely different from a blog. The difference is not an excuse; it's a reality that you are ignoring. This difference is not that of a 'pro', which suggests that the blog is amateur or deliberately misleading.

The difference is that the MSM has only one agenda, to provide us with facts, as differentiated from its other provision of opinion. The problem is, that the MSM merges the two; that's called propaganda.

A blog doesn't have such an agenda. And again, a blog is open not closed like the MSM. Any and all comments are open to rebuttal, clarification, analysis. Not the case with the MSM.

Kate's view that Palin was the 'clear-cut winner' in the debates is her opinion. Same with her view of Biden. Others, like you, have a different opinion.
One opinion may have more validity than another opinion - based on its adherence to facts and logic.

Did you 'correct' this blog's views of Palin? I don't recall that you did. I'm aware of real's post, in another thread, where he attempts to correct - but, his corrections are, in themselves, false (eg..'the Bush doctrine')or irrelevant (newspapers).

So, a blog is not simply the postings of the blog owner. It also consists of the comments. You don't seem to understand, or accept, this.

As for Palin, she's a chisel against the frozen monolith that is the Washington Culture. I'm completely in favour of her as such. I don't want just more Monolithic entrenchment..which is what we'll get with Obama-Biden. Except, with Obama, we also have a self-absorbed, narcissistic opportunist. And that's dangerous.

I don't know if he's a shill for Democrats/liberals etc. Just a case of him not doing his homework, I think. Because in the early 90s, he was blasted for hosting a phone-in show on CTV, taking calls with his guest Mulroney on the GST just before it came into law. There were no angry calls, just people wanting to lean more about the hated tax. Cartoonists, like the Sun's Donato, made fun of the program, by depicting a wall dividing Clark and Mulroney from those making the calls, inferring they were made by CTV employees.

Bullseye ET! Bullseye!
Another one like that and you'll split the arrow.

The Great Steyn is back and offers more commentary on the debate, including Biden's command of "the facts..."

"By contrast, Senator Biden was glib and fluent and in command of the facts — if by 'in command of the facts' you mean 'talks complete blithering balderdash and hogwash.'"

http://tinyurl.com/4aj6ms

Thhanks lynnh: that about sums it up. SP has been vetted by the MSM, not to their liking but the common American folks like her and her views. The reporter is payed by the Canadian tax payer to give an unbiased account, "which he did not". That is real nice clothing he has on which is again payed for by the Canadian tax payer. I bet he stays in nice diggs which is payed by for the Canadian tax payer. Where does his camera crew and support system stay, which is payed by for the Canadian tax payer. I wonder if flew down on 1rst, 2nd or business class which is payed by for the Canadian tax payer. CBC is part of the budget of Canada which is payed by for the Canadian tax payer.
Sorry Kate, I know that I am not supposed to feed the people who has objected to way you post but I had to stress that you are not being funded by the Canadian tax payer.

Er, Merle, "the reporter" in this case works for CTV, a publicly-held corporation, but not something paid for by the Canadian taxpayer (just by all our purchase decisions based on advertising they show us).

Doesn't change the fact that a news-gathering org still has to disseminate fact rather than filter it.

Not that it matters much any more.  I'm more and more pessimistic about Western society, based on the way the apparatchiks seem to want to drive the agenda...

Garth

Tom Clark's a Rosedale toff. Like most of the other Toronto Toffs, he's liberal, if not Liberal, and like most of the Toronto MSM, he's a shill for "the natural ruling party."

Whether he purposely let Biden off the hook or just didn't "know" about all these inaccuracies is simply splitting hairs. It's HIS JOB to dig deeper and neither he, nor Duffy, obviously did.

This is why more and more of us get our news from the blogs. Thanks, Kate, for the heads-up here.

Tom Clark how dare you not read spam propaganda, why just the other day I recieved one telling me that Obama's a muslim terrorist. And you call yourself a journalist!

As for Palin, she's a chisel against the frozen monolith that is the Washington Culture.

ET, all you provide here are your personal opinions. No facts. No logic. No reasoning. That's a pretty weak presentation -

Well then Jose, why don't you quote it in full here including the email addy of the sender?

Or Jose, if you could scan it and host it somewhere and provide the link.

Peter, I don't think you get how this blogging works. Bloggers like Kate tend to present the side of the stories that the MSM won't. There WILL (have been)be tens of thousands of words written about Palin's "mistakes". That's the default position of the MSM. What doesn't make it to print or screen is the balance about the other side.

Kate's never actually stated her political persuasion, although you are free to draw a conclusion from the participants in her blog. You could be wrong, though.

You guys can't seem to get past your partisanship - no critical thing whatsoever. There is a report out of CNN (go to newsbusters for the lead) by a speech analysis firm (yes, apparently there are those...) that the newspaper business writes to a grade 6 education level. Please tell me you're smarter than that. If you are, you should get that there are two (or more) sides to a story, not just the side from the grade sixers.

But he can pronounce nuclear.

Thanks Garth for the correction. That's how it works, put something out there that is incorrect and you can be corrected with a statement of fact.

manny - so now you are into lifting the words of someone else, namely, my own words? Heh. Try to do some thinking. On your own.

Facts: that a news station is supposed to provide facts and clearly differentiate such facts from any opinions it may also provide.

Facts: a blog is not obliged to behave as a news station. However, it does, if it has comments, actually function as the correct nature of a news provider, because it is self-correcting in its entirety.

Facts: Peter is mixing up an MSM news station and a blog; they are two different communication systems.

Facts; an MSM system is linear; it is unable to self-correct itself. A blog is interactional; it is able to correct itself.

Fact: the Washington (and Ottawa-Montreal) govoernment infrastructure is isolate and monolithic. It talks to and with itself.

Fact: Sarah Palin is not a member of this Set. Therefore, it logically follows that she is an outsider, i,e., not a member of the Set.

My opinion, based on the above facts, is that a monolithic structure requires destabilizing and some fresh air. I define Sarah Palin as such.

Now, Manny, try, try to think a bit. On your own. Use your own words. And remember, facts are first, followed by logic, leading to reasonable opinions. Try it. Just once.

*
"anon says... I wonder if Tom Clark paid for
that new suit and expensive overcoat himself"

what's with collar on that puppy, anyway... is
he auditioning for a part in a new "star wars"
movie?

*

act: the Washington (and Ottawa-Montreal) govoernment infrastructure is isolate and monolithic. It talks to and with itself.
Fact: Sarah Palin is not a member of this Set. Therefore, it logically follows that she is an outsider, i,e., not a member of the Set.
My opinion, based on the above facts, is that a monolithic structure requires destabilizing and some fresh air. I define Sarah Palin as such.

ET, those are your unsubstantiated, personal opinions. No facts. No logic. No reasoning. That's still a pretty weak presentation.

Trolls disappeared on this one.
They dug a hole in the sandbox, then got buried when the real cats showed up.

neo:

I assume the upturned collar's supposed to make him look "rakish" and perhaps a little bit dangerous, like Bogart in Casablanca.  Whatever else you may think of him, Clark's a good-looking male and I'm sure the PR flacks at CTV want to play that up, since, sociologically speaking, humans tend to trust good-looking people more than average (or unattractive) people.

Sad, but true.

Garth

yoo hoo, manny. Use your own words. And insert some facts. Add logic. Then, come to your own opinions.

What you do, manny, is lift the opinions of others. That's why you are so angry. Nothing seems reasonable to you, because you don't do your own thinking, your own filtering, your own weeding, watering..and come to your own conclusions.

Now, try it. Again. But use your own words. And think, think, think. Don't just copy others.

Peter, your words from your blog read:

"The Conservatives record on the environment, drug policy, and the arts are abysmal and we as Canadians deserve better- we need someone who can ditch their ideology and partisanship and see the world for what it really is."

I know you are a Green voter but please elaborate on your writing. I'm a Canadian and you don't speak for me. I think Harper has done a great job by focusing on real pollution not CO2, which is not a pollutant gas, doesn't believe providing a site to consume illegal drugs is the way to go and has increased the Arts budget by 8% though refusing to continue to pay for elitists to travel to exotic spots on our dime. Seems "real" world to me.

You seem to dislike Palin because she doesn't fit neatly into your environmental cocoon with her hunting boots.

garth, as that great canadian poliwog pet once said, the world is unfolding as it should. i could be wrong on the exact wording. i wonder if pet read the bible. it would seem we are heading toward some serious prophetic comeupance.

What you do, manny, is lift the opinions of others. That's why you are so angry. Nothing seems reasonable to you, because you don't do your own thinking, your own filtering, your own weeding, watering..and come to your own conclusions.

Yet more unsubstantiated drivel. Where are your facts to support that conjecture? Weak,ET, weak.
And not being a member of what you opined as the "Set", qualifies one for one of the most powerful political positions on the planet? Pitiful.

You keep falling into ET's trap Manny. That shows your lack of logic and imagination.

manny ...not sure where you get your info, maybe the rag mags.
I read ET's assessment of Palin and I agree with that assessment based on what Palin says about Palin. Governor Palin has clearly informed us that she is not part of the Washington elite. ET didn't just pick that out of thin air, or a rag mag.

Now...we can ignore the trolls.
manny, you can get back to your rag mag.

dave - exactly right.

Harper doesn't merge pollution and emissions - as does Dion. [And the MSM doesn't confront Dion on this.] Harper is doing a great job with his Turning the Corner Action plan on both emissions and pollution, and cleaning up the Great Lakes and other waterways.
And - all those water treatment and water clean up projects across Canada.

I DO want the arts cut - I know that Harper has increased arts funding - but, I want the arts funding cut. I'm tired of subsidizing self-absorbed, undecipherable 'stuff' that is called 'art' only by those receiving funding. I'm tired of the incestuous, in-grown cabal of 'arts people' in Canada, who are on the boards, who award themselves and their set all our govt funds. They don't represent me or my Canada and I'm tired of them claiming to do so.

Sorry Kate...must stay on topic.
manny ...you keep on listening to Pretty Boy Clark.

Garth wood wrote, "Whatever else you may think of him, Clark's a good-looking male and I'm sure the PR flacks at CTV want to play that up, since, sociologically speaking, humans tend to trust good-looking people more than average (or unattractive) people."

What do you mean? Half the time he looks red faced (more than Fife) like he spent hours at the saloon before going to air. As well, his face is all pock marked.

Right Mary. The saloon, certainly not the salon.

CBCpravda moved this to the back page after about 3 hours.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/10/03/debate-reax.html

frankly Im surprised they could find the cahones to print it at all. they will use it as fodder for redemption when the "Harper regime" looks at selling them to Fox.

I just did a search on CBCpravda Harper Regime 22 stories, Martin Regime 2, Cretien Regime 2.Trudeau Regime 3, Mulroney Regime 5.

Tom Clark told viewers on Mike Duffy that his grandfather was founder of Toronto Star. This was just a few months ago. Connections.....

There are a few things to consider. Like a foreign tv network (that is part of a huge conglomerate doing lots of business down south) going around poking a US senator with more seniority than god in the eye. There would be painful payback, that you can bet on. And with Ivan Fecan the big boss, you would be toast.

So what if Biden acts like he is losing it? That's change, right?

mary:

Information isn't the only thing that filters are used on in the MSM.  ;-)

Garth

Did he happen to mention Palin's 18 lies?

If not, I don't think he can be called Partisan. He mentioned neither's lies.

Oddly enough, you aren't giving much coverage to these 18 lies either. Hypocrisy, perhaps?

As someone uninterested in who wins, this was one of the few election related broadcasts I watched. For laughs, of course. It wasn't bad. Palin didn't have me laughing, and Biden was a bore. I would call it a Palin victory too, albeit a marginal one.

The only criticism of Palin that I have is her bizzare "Gosh darn" attitude towards Americans. Why does she treat them like ten-year olds?

(and Ottawa-Montreal) govoernment infrastructure is isolate and monolithic. It talks to and with itself.

Embedded as I am in the above, Manny, I can vouch for this statement. However, ET is much to generous - isolate and monolithic is being too kind. It certainly talks to and with itself, and nobody's listening, and even if they were, they don't understand one another. Its not for nothing that Ottawa manageriocrats are referred to as the "ESLs".

I had posted on an earlier thread that my mother in-law is visiting Italy where she was born and raised.She called home to check up on things and asked my wife if we had heard about the terrorists arrested and deplaned from a KLM flight departing Amsterdam,destined for somewhere in Europe.A friend just told me he heard it on the radio this morning.Is Julie Couillard's book[which made the front page of the post]more newsworthy than this?I still have not heard anything from the media,doesn't fit with their agenda I guess.

notayank, you must not like the genius Deyawn (you mentioned, boring!) Deyawn bubbling about all the 'fun' you will be 'allowed' to have with the lewd, rude artsy fartsy folk if you will just elect a new Liberano regime headed by coil necked Deyawn.
"Ham I rihgt?"

Clark and his ilk have no reason to questions the assertions of people they agree with.

Reading the comments on the CBC debate results just reaffirms the definition of insanity to me.

Every election the Liberal party puts out a list of promises and they are all very similar and their brain-dead supporters all hug each other and what this wonderful party will do to lead Canada to the promised land. After they win the election the promises are put away until the next time and nothing is done aside from replenishing the party coffers, business as usual. Insanity!

The solid accomplishments of the Conservatives mean nothing to these stirred up ants as their hate-filled posts never acknowledge them. I really worry about this country.

As Yuri Bezmenov, the KGB agent for propaganda said, once you convince the left of the socialist program, and it is surprisingly easy, they are unchangeable and will always follow the socialist/liberal banner. The main people the KGB focused on were journalists, teachers, actors and the intellectual elite as they could sway others. Same groups we complain about today.

I'll wager the old gossip loving Duffy will have Julie Couillard on his show soon. It would feed into the agenda of CTV and other media to give her plenty of attention during the election.

Her he said/she said diatribe of a woman scorned won't affect her ex-lover boy's chances of getting re-elected, apparently he's winning big in his riding.

Thanks for that summary Dave.Very revealing.
Obviously 'most' hard working tax payers are more difficult to deceive with socialist propaganda.

I read ET's assessment of Palin and I agree with that assessment based on what Palin says about Palin

So you agree with ET's unsubstantiated nonsense and Palin's inane self-assessment, bluetech? Why am I not impressed?

Yeah, what IS it with Duffy? He's such an old puff-ball gossip monger. He's always dropping little tid-bits of infomation/aka gossip we, the viewers, really don't need to know.

If I was one of his interviewees/commentators of whom he'd just dropped one of his little info-bombs, I'd be really pi**ed off. Of course, as he's mentioned to many of them, they're paid well. WT_?

I don't find him or his I-know-something-you-don't-know smirk cute. I wish he'd be more professional and stop playing the arent'-I-a-cute-elephant-in-my-pink-tu-tu? routine.

It's embarrassing.

"Agree with"
Hey, he looks good and can read a teleprompter.
He's one of them.

Actually, it is the MSM that made the case for Palin being an outsider. For example, they were the ones who immediately attacked her (like failing to be on Meet the Press)and confirmed her "outsider" status. Go back and review the commentary of NBC, ABC, CNN, NYT etc. The evidence is clearly there.

"Whatever else you may think of him, Clark's a good-looking male and I'm sure the PR flacks at CTV want to play that up, since, sociologically speaking, humans tend to trust good-looking people more than average (or unattractive) people."

Yup, just look at Lizzie May.

Horny Toad

Is it true that "Aunt Bea" was voted the ugliest man in the debates?

"Why am I not impressed?"

My guess is fetal alcohol syndrome.

manny thinks we are here to 'impress' him...???
must be from the COTU...aka Trawnna....

In other news today and appropos of this thread, I was in the supermarket checkout line and noticed an article in a periodical there.
It told me that an alien was discovered on Mars.
I know it must be true because the media said so.

On that note, with really the best intentions of having fair and balanced discussion I spent some time today searching for that 'list of Palin lies' that manny referred to...all due respect to the trolls and all that...

nada.
nothing.
zip.

No surprise I was sent to Huffington Post.
A few accusations, no list.

Maybe I should check some rag mags.

bluetech,

Seems your computer has some filters too. Or your mind. I suspect the latter.

Sarah Palin's 18 debate lies!
Easy enough for you to muddle through!

1. FANNIE MAE/FREDDIE MAC: Palin said “it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures,” but fact checkers say that’s “Quite A Stretch” And “Barely True,” and that McCain was a “latecomer” to the discussion.

2. FUNDAMENTALS ARE STRONG: Palin tried to say “John McCain saying our economy was strong” but McCain has used the phrase “The Fundamentals Of The Economy Are Strong” At Least 16 Times This Year.

3. PARTISAN POLITICS: Palin said McCain is “known for putting partisan politics aside to just get the job done,” but he has voted with Bush 90% of the time in the Senate and bragged about his support for Bush on important issues.

4. TAXES ATTACK: Palin repeated the attack that Obama voted for higher taxes 94 times, which the New York Times says is “false,” CNN says is “Misleading,” and FactCheck.org says is “inflated.”

5. TOBACCO REGULATION: Palin said to “look at the tobacco industry” as an example of McCain pushing for even harder and tougher regulations. But McCain opposed expanding the SCHIP children’s health insurance program for 5.8 million children because it would increase tobacco taxes.

6. SPENDING INCREASES: Palin said Obama is is proposing “nearly a trillion dollars in new spending,” but didn’t mention that he has also proposed cuts to balance it out, an attack CNN has already debunked as “misleading” and that ignores the far larger cost of McCain’s tax cuts and spending hikes.

7. HEALTH CARE: Palin claimed Obama’s health plan is “government run” which has been widely debunked as a “canard.”

8. HEALTH CARE. Palin says taxes wouldn’t go up under the McCain health care plan, a fact even his own campaign has acknowledged isn’t true. She also said that McCain's plan was "budget neutral" when in reality, it would increase the deficit by 1.3 trillion dollars over the course of 10 yrs.

9. TROOPS: Palin repeated what the AP called the “highly misleading” attack that Obama opposed funding for the troops, and Factcheck.org notes that the same methodology would lead to the same conclusion for McCain.

10. GLOBAL WARMING: Palin said “I don’t want to argue about the causes” for global warming, when she has clearly taken the position that she doesn’t not believe it is man-made.

11. MCCAIN IS CONSISTENT: Palin said McCain” doesn't tell one thing to one group and then turns around and tells something else to another group,” when that is exactly what he has done on immigration, telling Hispanic leaders he was for comprehensive reform instead of the enforcement focused approach he has taken with conservatives.

12. MCCLELLAN NOT MCKIERNAN: Palin referred to the US commander in Afghanistan, David McKiernan as “McClellan.”

13. MCKIERNAN ON “SURGE:” Palin said that [McKiernan] did not say a surge wouldn’t work in Afghanistan, when just yesterday he said “The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ’surge,’ ” McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a “sustained commitment” to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution. [http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/02/mccain-mckiernan-afghanistan/]

14. KILLING CIVILIANS. Palin said “Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air raiding villages and killing civilians and such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment again hurts our cause. That's not what we are doing there.” Unfortunately, the Associated Press says that Obama was right in discussing a critically important point about avoiding civilian casualties.

15. TEACHING: Palin said we need to make sure “that education in either one of our agendas, I think, absolute top of the line,” when McCain has repeatedly favored tax cuts for the wealthy over funds for more teachers and class size reduction.

16. PARTISAN APPOINTMENTS: Palin said “You do what I did as governor. And you appoint people regardless of party affiliation. Democrats, independents, Republicans, you walk the walk, don't just talk the talk” when she repeatedly appointed friends and supporters to positions for which they weren’t qualified.

17. FOCUS ON CLIMATE CHANGE: Palin falsely claimed that she was the first governor to form a climate change subcabinet, when at least 28 states had already taken action.

18. DARFUR DIVESTMENT: Palin claimed that “when I and others” found out that the state had money invested in Sudan that “we called for divestment,” when the reality is that Palin’s appointees worked to kill a Darfur divestment plan.

Source: Yes to Democracy

Regards,

troll

To keep it light, love the turned up collar, Tom, a la Edward R. Murrow (minus the cigarette) in London during the Blitz.
An affectation that Dan Rather tried to pull off a few years back.
Cute. Really cute.

For starters: #12 is not a lie.

and #2 sure is picky on your part. #10 is a lie? Hmmmmm. However, I will concede #4 is a gaffe on Palin's part. On #13, had you quoted the full text of the General's statement, you would have found that Palin accurately reflected the essence of the General's thoughts, if not his words. I will have to do some more checking on the others, but I do not have lots of confidence in your post based on what I know already.

A question to notayank. Define "a lie."

Kate:

It's CTV. To paraphrase Homer Simpson:

"Face it, they're just not that bright."

Re: No. 2.

Unemployment at 6.1%.

Inflation flat.

Debt and deficit increasing.

Fundamentals one and two OK, fundamental three shaky.

So, would the remedy be MORE spending?

Am I missing some fundamental?

No. 10. Palin has said on numerous occasions that the globe is warming, has told interviewers man has affected the climate since he's been on the plantet and clearly has said she believes other factors need to be considered ... such as cylical patterns that have brought warming and cooling trends through the millenia.

Byden, on the other hand, attributed it all to man-made causes.

Unless you regard anybody's opinion which disagrees with yours a lie, term it what it is ... a difference of opinion.

One thing that i have found interesting is that Ms. Palin used the phrase (when interviewed) "I'm not going to solely blame all of man's activities on changes in climate ..." which is backwards to what I think she meant. At first I thought it was just a gaff and meant nothing.

But during the debate she said it again "I'm not one to attribute every man -- activity of man to the changes in the climate. " Strange!

John

bluetech and Mr Warden - can I call you Brent? -

I didn't actually go through either set of lies. I expect both sides have put a spin on the "lies" of the other. I just found it odd that bluetech searched for them without being able to find them - I ran that search once and found this. Oops.

I am not particulary interested in the US debate, or its veracity. Unlike ET, I am not convinced that Sarah Palin, fresh breath of air though she may be, is ever going to be able to do anything decisive wihout the approval of her GOP handlers. Ditto Obama and Dem handlers. The system is too old and entrenched. President's are usually just blamable faces for entrenched interests. Look at Bush and the neo-cons. McCain doesnt want to be associated with Bush anymore, but the neo-cons continue untouched.

notawank

do you know the difference between a fact and an opinion???????

"manny thinks we are here to 'impress' him...???
must be from the COTU...aka Trawnna...."

Hey, don't stick him in my province, we have enough of them as it is. Pretty sure he's in regina.

Yeah...cuz who cares about details...

Who is Mr. Warden, btw?

notayank, do you know the difference between "President's" and "Presidents"?

(There is one;-)

Kate: This might be something to follow more closely.

Speaking of Lies:

In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas.

Kate: This might be something to follow more closely.

Speaking of Lies:
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/Obama_fundraising_illegal/2008/09/29/135718.html

In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas.

Re: #14 (from notayank)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLlyjGjeZIY

"I just found it odd that bluetech searched for them without being able to find them - I ran that search once and found this. Oops."

Yeah..it really stumped me when I didn't find the list at Huffington Post.

Simple birth control method to Quote Ed, from Married with Children, a picture of Whoopie Goldberg. Here in the frozen north an 8 by 10 of Lizzy May will usually do the trick, but if one is still horney after viewing just listen to the debate for 30 seconds and the urge will soon pass. Watching the {tolerant ones} the entertainment and media go after this poor woman Sarah is the most disgusting thing we have ever witnessed. The {tolerant ones} will soon be resorting to violence and possibly worse as their scam unravels. What evil people these bastards are! They are not capable of joking it is all anger and rage, the tolerant liberals.

More from the Newsmax article:

With such lax vetting of foreign contributions, the Obama campaign may have indirectly contributed to questionable fundraising by foreigners.

"Yeah..it really stumped me when I didn't find the list at Huffington Post."

Say it aint so, Joe. Gosh darn, doggonit.

And all the other grade-school catchphrases that y'all find so charming. She really does address American voters like grade school children. And they lap it up. They can identify with being talked to like ten-year olds. The positively revel in it. Am I the only one who finds this alarming?

Don't get me wrong - I am all for McCain and staying in Iraq. With all due respect to ET and others here, thank God for the suits of Washington and GOP handlers who will hopefully keep Palin away from real power. I just happen to believe Joe Six Pack, whatever his merits, should not be leading the most powerful nation in the world. Leave that to people who see the world as being full of clever adults, not star struck ten-year olds.

You have to understand the left. They have a different definition of lying than most of us. Their defintion of a "lie" is "something they disagree with." So it is pretty easy for them to find dozens of such "lies" in any speech by any Republican, even Abe Lincoln.

Conservatives have a more "conservative" defintion of lying, that is a "deliberate untruth", under this standard, it is pretty hard to nail Biden as a liar, since he likely has no idea when he is telling the truth or not. That anyurism appears to have somehow disconnected him from reality.

He did depart from accuracy at least a couple dozen times though.

There are a lot of rats in any society or ethnic group (Don’t believe in the Race Theory) that seem to get away with it. For a while, than we meet our maker, kinnda hard to lie to the Creator. Or they go down a self destructive road, either deliberately or reflexively if they possess a sense of right and wrong at all.

Its not that the OJ jury was stupid or even that mostly blacks appeared to believed him. My own Mother did. This had political implications from the Rodney King event just before. People forget the social climate at the time. How the police that beat him where acquitted, the riots et al. Yes as Mr. Teach & Eric said, it had a lot to do with a lame prosecuting office looking for fame in la la land.

ooops sorry wrong thread. My appologies

Somebody should tell the media what happened that night.

Biden was billed as the foreign affairs superstar and the great debater who would demolish the outclassed small time Mayor from rube city Alaska. He walked into the debate hall with heavy credentials and a long history in politics. He had been there many times and done that often. To help his cause he had a pro Obama moderator and the site was Democrat friendly. This indeed was a cold dark arena for a hockey mom Republican to play the home team in.

She was set up and ready for the kill as she had already been exposed as an empty blouse by media top guns, Couric and Gibson. Her flight to the political troposphere was to be brief, forgettable and inconsequential as she faded into history.

Her previous triumph at the convention was seen as a one off performance that would not happen again. Her success was attributed to the professional use of a teleprompter and speech writers. Biden’s job was to administer the coup de grace and finish her off. We were going to see an execution live and in prime time.

That is not what happened. Biden was under assault all night and was incapable of defending himself. Palin attacked often and effectively and while she was at it she captured the heart of America and redefined the Presidential race to the White House.

It doesn’t matter what the media says about this they have lost what remained of their credibility. Seventy million people got to form their own judgment on this one. They want more of Palin. Nobody is requesting Biden.

Palin may have a lot to learn but Biden has a lot to re-learn.

Here's the definitive well written summary of Palin's gaffe's.

Sarah Biden, Vice-Presidential meltdown.
By Victor Davis Hanson

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmU3YzIyZDU1ZTM2OTc1MTI0Mzc3Njc3ODFmYzZjNWY=

Enjoy.

geoff - perhaps you failed to notice that the article was written as a parody. It states that explicitly.

" And all the other grade-school catchphrases that y'all find so charming. "

Actually, we don't... And just as McCain/Palin had begun the slide concurrent with 'our' realization of her puerile, self serving act... this ticket will, but for this initial stabilization of the hard core 'conservative' base, continue to go south... perhaps so much so as to overcome those that would not vote for Anyone of color, period (and we have yet to see the 'Willy Horton'esque 'contributions' from the off-main street ads)

I suggested, many months ago, that the only chance Republicans had would be to run McCain. Palin, I believe has sunk that potential~

Thanks for the link, Geoff. I guess you didn’t make it to the end of the article, where, as ET points out, it said, “This PARODY [emphasis mine] is by NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution”.

It seems that Hanson has made a collage of the gaffes of the main DEMOCRATIC contenders for the office of POTUS and VP and—as the MSM would love to do, and, by inference, often does—blame Sarah Palin and make her look like the foolish one.

One example: “The same uncertainty seems to extend to foreign policy. Under cross-examination, Palin appeared confused about her own recent trips abroad, first claiming that her helicopter had ‘been forced down’ in Afghanistan, although other passengers suggested the landing was a routine cautionary measure to avoid a possible snowstorm. Palin likewise had alleged that she was shot at while in Baghdad’s Green Zone, although there was no evidence from her security detail that she had, in fact, come under hostile fire.”

I know for sure that this gaffe—as in lie—was made by Hillary, not Sarah.

Here’s more: “The recently-elected Governor Palin was further rattled by media scrutiny, when, in a moment of embarrassing candor, she confessed, “Mitt Romney is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Quite frankly he might have been a better pick than me.” [Biden’s the one who made that claim—referring to Hillary as his possible better.] That confession followed an earlier deer-in-the-headlights moment, when the nearly hysterical Palin urged a wheel-chair bound state legislator to rise: ‘Sally, stand up, let the people see you!’” Again, it’s Joe Biden who made this blunder.

Hanson ends his parody, “No wonder rumors mount that Sen. McCain is now seeking a possible graceful exit for the gaffe-prone Palin, even as the Obama campaign continues to make the contrast with their own sober and circumspect Joe Biden”!!!!

Geoff got caught out because, Geoff, you can fool some conservatives some of the time, but you can fool most MSM propaganda-fed and ignorant liberals most of the time. If Geoff had been knowledgeable about this campaign, he’d have been able to “Pick the mismatches” all by himself. (But, seeing as he didn’t apparently, read the whole article, I guess that would make sorting out the smoke and mirrors difficult.)

Actually, esin--probably another propagandized camp follower--I disagree with you and find the racist slur offensive.

I watched the Biden-Palin debate last night on YouTube. (It was a much more coherent and professional format than the pit bull pile-on in our deluded dominion last Thursday.) I was very impressed by Sarah's courtesy, intelligence, and grasp of the issues--and not from a Washington insider's--thank God!--point of view. No one's perfect, but the MSM are doing every-dirty-thing possible to make Sarah Palin look like a hillbilly devil.

The MSM have fooled a whole lot of Geoffs and esins, who don't seem disposed to take the initiative to look and think outside the box.

"I was very impressed by Sarah's courtesy, intelligence, and grasp of the issues--and not from a Washington insider's--thank God!--point of view"

Are you a Washington insider?

"No one's perfect, but the MSM are doing every-dirty-thing possible to make Sarah Palin look like a hillbilly devil."

Hillbilly, yes. Devil, no. But then again, she is the one who insists on portraying that image because the American voters love it. Just like they go all warm and fuzzy when she says Gosh darn. Its alarmingly patronizing - the tone she takes towards voters. She treats them like little children. Which is cool - execept this isnt the election for the local PTA.

I know that Clark looks real hansom in the picture but he gave his opinion on the debate of who he thought did the best?.
Was all over the sites yesterday comparing articles and MSM "the supposed news source of the world" says that Bidin won.
www.michellemalkin.com was there and has pictures of debate and after. Took one of MSM media after debate and I still thinking that they are picking up their jaw from the floor. Like they say "a picture is worth a thousand words". Took another of DNC convention party after debate "nobody there, maybe they give the after DNC people the wrong address, who knows"?. Like they say "a picture is worth a thousand words". Had picture of the Rep party after debates "big crowd, everybody happy, SP & family reaching out shaking hands, my even little "Piper" taking time out to sign autographs". Like they say "a picture is worth a thousand words".

Note: Clark may look good but he never reported after the debates. Had to go to the blogs. So I guess the blogs are taking over!. HAHAHAHAHAHA

Sent via e-mail to news@ctv.ca
_________________________________

Dear CTV News Director;

I'm quoting below, a few passages from a popular Canadian blog with which I fully concur. 'Reporting' has become an embarassment in the national news media and I like many, no longer rely on the MSM for accuracy nor fairness. CBC has long been dismissed as a source of uncoloured reporting accuracy and sadly, CTV is traveling the same road. I'm sending this same message to all in my address book and will urge them to in turn consider whether they feel they and the nation are being well served or whether they too should spread the word that CTV can no longer be relied upon for complete, fair and accurate news coverage.

You may wish to consider what is occuring in the printed media throughout N.A. They are rapidly losing subscribers and advertisers. Should you gamble on your reputation for veracity, you may find your network drawing viewers only to 'entertainment' programming, where their opinions are not being willfully manipulated.

Kate,

You've hit the nail on the head about why so many Canadians and Europeans are so incredibly anti-American and anti-Republican. Just like continuous propaganda from the regimes of Hitler and Stalin, so have these hundreds of millions of sheep received endless negativity reporting poised from a far-left slant.

The only amazing thing is that some of us outside of the U.S. of A. have actually figured out how to think for ourselves. A curious bunch we are!

Robert

notayank, please speak for yourself. I don't feel that Sarah Palin's speaking down to me. On the contrary, I think she's levelling with me. You're free to think what you like, but you don't speak for a whole lot of us. And, it would seem to me that you might be questioning the extreme vitriol aimed at her. Where do you think that comes from, if she's just an annoying school marm?

God bless Sarah and America!

Sent via e-mail to news@ctv.ca
_________________________________

Dear CTV News Director;

I'm quoting below, a few passages from a popular Canadian blog with which I fully concur. 'Reporting' has become an embarassment in the national news media and I like many, no longer rely on the MSM for accuracy nor fairness. CBC has long been dismissed as a source of uncoloured reporting accuracy and sadly, CTV is traveling the same road. I'm sending this same message to all in my address book and will urge them to in turn consider whether they feel they and the nation are being well served or whether they too should spread the word that CTV can no longer be relied upon for complete, fair and accurate news coverage.

You may wish to consider what is occuring in the printed media throughout N.A. They are rapidly losing subscribers and advertisers. Should you gamble on your reputation for veracity, you may find your network drawing viewers only to 'entertainment' programming, where their opinions are not being willfully manipulated.

Holy jeez. Of course I read the whole article. It took me one paragraph to determine that it was a parody. If it took you to the end you are pretty thick!

I though people were smarter around here. The title gives it away: Sarah Biden.

Given an ounce of intelligence you would have noted that throughout the article it is pretty much a search "Biden" replace with "Palin"

Thanks for coming out.

" I was very impressed by Sarah's courtesy, intelligence, and grasp of the issues "~lookout

You impress easily. Mrs. Palin seems of average intelligence, someone that never quite got over being center stage - that happened to be in the right place at the 'right' time these last some odd years.

Her grasp of the issues will be served up as comedy for years to come, and that if McCain/Palin Don't win (else, Tina Fey will be able to retire on her impression of Mrs Palin).

As regards the racial slur, I assume you mean my comment that many will not vote for Obama simply because he is of color (there are no Black men in America), that, for example, most over 55 are afraid of 'black people', period. It is my suggestion that Obama will need to go into the election with close to a 10 pt. lead or he will not win for this hidden bias ~sorry, reality bites sometimes