Putin strong? He cannot even control his own propaganda machine

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Let me clarify then and apologize for confusing you. Since you, or others have a viewpoint, please take a few minutes to make a statement about what you think is real and what you think is false IN YOUR OWN WORDS. Don't rely on posting news reports without posting your own personal observations. It's so damned easy to post a news story and then make a statement like: "There, in your face!" Come out of your protective shell and put yourself out there.

There is no confusion from me, so no apology necessary.

You asked for evidence of false news reporting and I provided you with some.

If you aren't interested, simply say so and I won't provide it.

I gave you examples of lies told during news reports and you dismissed them as opinions, when they were not presented as opinions at all.

If you don't want to read, that's fine, just don't pretend to want to.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

There is no confusion from me, so no apology necessary.

You asked for evidence of false news reporting and I provided you with some.

If you aren't interested, simply say so and I won't provide it.

I gave you examples of lies told during news reports and you dismissed them as opinions, when they were not presented as opinions at all.

If you don't want to read, that's fine, just don't pretend to want to.

C'mon Penny. I will go there with you. Just tell me in your own words where you think Fox News got it wrong.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

C'mon Penny. I will go there with you. Just tell me in your own words where you think Fox News got it wrong.

I showed you where they got it wrong. Multiple times.

Why would me telling you what they got wrong be any different than providing you a link to what they got wrong? You wouldn't believe my own words without links to proof anyway, right? So I gave it all to you in one handy little link! Lies vs truths. All laid out for you.

But at the end of the day, you are not genuinely interested in either. If you were, you'd check out the evidence I already posted rather than this deflection after the fact.

You asked for evidence from a source and I provided it. Now you don't want it from a source, you want it from me.

Oh well, I tried Thanks for playing.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

Truthfully I scanned the report long enough to see the theme and I dismiss it. That's the reason I ask for you to state it in your own words. If you're so confident that the information you presented is correct, I too am confident that you can debate it with me here in the open forum in your own words. Let's assume that all news stories are #######. What do you think about it personally?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Discussions here on VJ are not evidence of debunking. Let's see some evidence from news sources.

If you read the link(clearly you didn't) you'd see the discussion wasn't the debunking part. The fox news link was posted with the information clearly left out to blame the woman and her family's incarceration on Islam. After posting at least 2 more links that told the same story with the information that explained why she was arrested, it's clear Fox News was trying to slam Islam.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Truthfully I scanned the report long enough to see the theme and I dismiss it. That's the reason I ask for you to state it in your own words. If you're so confident that the information you presented is correct, I too am confident that you can debate it with me here in the open forum in your own words. Let's assume that all news stories are #######. What do you think about it personally?

I'm not interested in the debate you're attempting to have with me. I won't bite, I'm sorry.

I implied that Fox News was inaccurate in its reporting and you told me that if I believe that, I should post where they were inaccurate and back it up.

I provided you with the info. Dismiss it if you'd like. I did my part.

It is clear that you did not scan the report long enough, seeing as you tried to inform me that I was posting opinions when I was not.

Maybe you'll scan a little longer next time. Doubt it.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Penny Lane

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Why do folks ask for facts here, but hate it when their facts don't support their agenda?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

It's a pretty unbiased source, which is exactly what was asked for. It mentions the untruths that have been told by ALL networks and all network personalities. I thought it would be acceptable, but it wasn't even read, so... Lesson learned. There was no genuine interest in the first place.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Global Warming is not science. Come on. You can do better than that! By the way, statements from commentators is NOT news reporting. It's opinion. Learn the difference.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Discussions here on VJ are not evidence of debunking. Let's see some evidence from news sources.

Ok, so you got the news sources you asked for and now you want the discussions that in your own words don't count?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Ok, so you got the news sources you asked for and now you want the discussions that in your own words don't count?

And yet he seems genuinely confused as to why I won't engage in that debate.

If Marvin's discussion didn't count, not sure why mine would...

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And yet he seems genuinely confused as to why I won't engage in that debate.

If Marvin's discussion didn't count, not sure why mine would...

'cause you're not black, silly...

[LibCampFireClub 635]

And for fun, take a look at the Fox personalities on this list and see how many truths there are vs the lies:

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/

Compare that to CNN.

Your anti-fox newspaper has quite a reputation in Florida. I discounted your piece about global warming as its political junk science. As for the pundant hit piece from the Tampa Bay Times:

Note: As for the "good read" quote, I agree in the same way as the funny papers.

The Tampa Bay Times, until Jan. 1, 2012, was known as The St. Petersburg Times (St. Pete Times or The Times for short). Known locally as the “Florida Pravda”, it has been an ultra-liberal anti-Republican paper for the past 65 years, but a good read.

The Times has long scorned Republicans as bigots, choosing to overlook that it was Republicans who ensured passage of President Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 civil rights legislation, when many Senate Democrats voted against it. While The Times gave lip service to civil rights, it supported Florida’s two Democrat U.S. senators who voted against the legislation, one of them being Sen. Spessard Holland.

Edited March 6, 2014 by ExExpat

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Your anti-fox newspaper has quite a reputation in Florida. I discounted your piece about global warming as its political junk science. As for the pundant hit piece from the Tampa Bay Times:

Note: As for the "good read" quote, I agree in the same way as the funny papers.

Well, since you've discounted Penny's piece, why don't you work on mine?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Your anti-fox newspaper has quite a reputation in Florida. I discounted your piece about global warming as its political junk science. As for the pundant hit piece from the Tampa Bay Times:

Note: As for the "good read" quote, I agree in the same way as the funny papers.

You discount anything you don't like - regardless of whether or not you actually read it.

As for the "anti-Fox" newspaper, more proof you didn't bother looking at the link. You'd think if it was so anti-Republican, it wouldn't routinely call out Democrats..

But hey, don't worry about it, I'm sure Fox News is exactly as fair and balanced as you claim it to be. No propaganda there. It's everyone else that's lying to you.

You're welcome to actually READ the information I've posted for you - and explore the links that back up the claims of whether or not a statement is a lie.

I mean, you won't, but you're welcome to!

Edited March 6, 2014 by Penny Lane