posted
Like I'm going to take your word for it Tom. Link please.
Besides, they weren't threatening with Libel, but with McCain-Fiengold. And we've covered that.
And if Moveon.org didn't violate McCain-Fiengold, then niether did the Swift Boat Vets and you still have no leg to stand on.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Like I'm going to take your word for it Tom."
You know, I would LOVE for you to manage to come up with a single thread in which I've been provably wrong.
Tell you what: I'll bet you ten bucks that this citation is accurate. You willing to put your money where your skepticism is, or are you going to pretend that it's more likely that this is a huge hoax?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm just not going to believe it without a link. There are many many things I could post here that I don't have a link that this forum would accept.
Example, I could supply a link to a story at Jewish World Review about how 3 frenchmen slung anti-semetic remarks and a group of jewish students at THE AUSWITZ HOLOCOST MUSEUM today, but no one here would ever accept a link from that site (I've tried before)
Anything I post on this predominately left wing/authoritarian blog must have an (AP)/(REUTERS) or similar tag on it and I must supply a link. That's the way it's been here for ages.
Therefore, before I believe a copied article I must have a link back to the source.
posted
Pixiest- On page one you stated that the Globe article was an outright lie written by Kerry's biographer.
Neither of the individual statements there are accurate as you present them.
Last summer, the Globe ran a 7 peice series on Kerry. This spring, the Boston Globe published a book based upon research and interviews done for that series, which contains a lot of new information. Kranich, as a long time staff member of the Boston Globe, was one of the journalists involved in the process of putting together the series, and then writing this book. Obviously, to some extent, this is a biography. However, as you try to present it, this means KRanich is linked to Senator Kerry in a manner which makes it unethical for him to write articles about Kerry. THis is false. The research done, and the Biography itself, are non-partisan, and attempt to show the true nature of Senator Kerry, who was EXTREMELY upset at the Boston Globe about the content of that 7 part series.
Kranich also hasn't lied in this article. The quotes he used were on the record. THe context he used them may have been extremely bad, and for that, I wrote an angry letter to the Globe (as I am a subscriber) and called them to express my displeasure. HOWEVER, Elliott himself seems to be confused about his stance on Kerry, as many of the comments he made to Kranich were also made to another journalist. As well, he spoke out in favor of kerry at least through 1996. I do not know what changed his mind about Senator Kerry, and he's entiteld to his opinion. However, he doesn't seem to have a consistent view point on the man, and whether he deserved the medals.
Kranich didn't lie. He may have used Elliotts quotes out of context, but so far the Boston Globe (although they have endorsed Kerry, the Globe, including Kranich, in general have written more positive things about Bush then Kerry) has not backed down from the article.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yah. Thats the best we've got on that... a statement that some journalists received such a copy. However, the actual copies don't seem to exist.
Edit: This was in response to a post Pixiest seems to have deleted.
[ August 09, 2004, 05:47 PM: Message edited by: Paul Goldner ]
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is one link I found and it was all over the other news sites when this happened several months ago.
As for why I haven't posted a link before now PIXIEST, its because i was away from the computer. Some of us DO have a few things to occupy us rather than sitting in front of a computer all day. Maybe not MUCH else, but else nonetheless.
Posts: 986 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Last year, Boston Globe reporters working on a multipart series uncovered the stunning news that John Kerry's paternal grandfather was Jewish. This book, an expansion of that series, doesn't find any smoking guns about the presumptive Democratic candidate for president. But it does offer a detailed and at times critical biography of the Massachusetts senator.
posted
I'm not sure what your point is, Pixiest. That would be exactly what I said it was.
If Kranich is Kerry's biographer for a critical examination of who he is, in an attempt to inform the public, then he's obviously highly qualified to write about Kerry. You implied Kranich is not highly qualified to write articles about kerry, and has a conflict of interest, which would imply that the biography was sponsored by kerry, and that writing about Kerry in such a way compromises his neutrality. My point was that this particular book does NOT compromise Kranich's neutrality, because its a critical examination, and the information was gathered through a long research effort which Kerry was upset about, because it didn't present him in a highly favorable light.
[ August 09, 2004, 05:58 PM: Message edited by: Paul Goldner ]
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: posted August 09, 2004 04:54 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I see why he wouldn't post the link.
And now we all see why he didn't care if you believed him.
And just in case you don't get what I'm saying:
quote: Anything I post on this predominately left wing/authoritarian blog must have an (AP)/(REUTERS) or similar tag on it and I must supply a link. That's the way it's been here for ages
Here's another one.
I forgot.....you only have to do that if you are liberal, right?
I am neither Republican or Democrat, nor do I really care for either candidate, and I am from MA so I have been aware of Kerry for longer that most of the people here on Hatrack.
Just in case you would like to insult me specifiable instead of in general.
. . . The difference between the two ads is that most of the people in the Vet's ads have recanted or stated that they have been misquoted. I have read that in several places, and if I have time to look the articles up I will, and post a link....god knows that I wouldn't expect you to "take my word for it", even though others have already posted several links to the same articles.
The ads against Bush state his publicly stated positions, and complain about them and what they would mean to workers here in the US.
They don't question his "service record", such as it is, and they don't criticize his combat record (he has none)....mostly because the records have "disappeared"....go figure.
They don't call into question his well earned citations (he had none) or honors. Honors that passed all screwtiny....until he began running against Bush.
. . . . . .You can, here in the US, ask questions and challenge positions of candidates.
>>You can't lie, or make false claims based on statements that have bee retracted, or ones that were never made in the first place.
posted
Sorry I deleted the previous post Paul. I accidently clicked the reply button before I was done with the post, then realized that wasn't the article I was looking for (the one I was looking for seems to have expired and been removed from the news website.)
Book: Thank you for posting a link. Still, that has to do with McCain-Fiengold, not libel. And I agree we should dump that law. It's a horrible law as I said in my previous post. I was agog that it passed every step of the way. But if it is the law it must be enforced. If there is a misconception about the law it must be cleared up.
Since MoveOn.Org is not in volation of the law, neither is SwiftVets.Com.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not true...they weren't accused of breaking the same laws.
There is a difference of opinion on if the campain financing laws even apply to Moveon.org, but there is no question of libel or slander laws applying to either candidate....they are appliable to both.
. . . For the record, I hate most negitive ads in general, regardless of who puts them out. But if the ads focus on issues instead of character assination they are easier to take.
posted
I just tried to edit my post from 2 posts ago....I can't spell for anything, so feel free to make fun of me for that. I deserve it...
Also, I wanted to add a smiley to the post where if said "if you want to insult me specifically", because I as joking (kinda) but it didn't come across that way...but I can't edit my own post!
Weird...
. . . . .must be a conspiracy! Damn Liberals! Or was it Conservatives?
posted
The reason I brought it up is that if you're going to beat on one side for doing something, then give an equal beating to the other side for doing the same thing..
Posts: 986 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Since MoveOn.Org is not in volation of the law, neither is SwiftVets.Com."
Which law? SwiftVets is being accused of violating libel law by knowingly lying about Kerry and his record. MoveOn is being accused of violating campaign finance law by taking out TV ads. While it's true that if MoveOn is guilty of the latter that SwiftVets, which has done the same thing, is ALSO guilty, the reverse -- that if SwiftVets has lied about Kerry, then MoveOn has lied about Bush -- does not follow.
Which MoveOn ad would you say contains blatant and provable lies?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
