You would think so, wouldn’t you?
My Lexis/Nexis search found, in the month after March 18, 2003, exactly three articles referring to her comments.
Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), March 23, p. H1.
New York Times, April 13, Section 2 (Arts and Leisure), p. 1.
Daily Telegraph (London), April 15, p. 22.
Where’s that damn liberal media when you need it, eh milroy?
A retraction and an a profuse apology from the OP is in order. If he has any integrity left that is – which is highly doubtful judging by his history on this board.
“Beautiful mind,” indeed.
Precisely. Watching the RNC, and the people just lapping up the lies, was horribly depressing.
Not to be a dick, but what did you expect? Would you have expected, at the DNC, for a rising insurgence reacting at any misinformation, regardless of importance? Conventions are for people of a particular political stripe to get together, feel good about themselves and their chances of winning and issue forth lots of party propaganda. It’s like a slumber party for adults; just replace “Billy is sooooo cute” with “Kerry is such a flip-flopper” or “Bush wouldn’t know a dictionary if it were an oil tycoon paying him off” and you have an almost completely analogous system:D
Not if you’ve lost any shred of faith in human intelligence or decency. Then it’s actually quite entertaining.
Webmaster of underreported.com here. The end of my blog entry has an update that has a link to a free reference – an International Herald Tribune copy of a May 23, 2004 New York Times column.
http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=521066.html
mhendo, I am not questioning your honesty in any way. But I find it kinda strange that literally no one can provide a legitimate cite for the quotation.
commondreams.org is not a cite
charlierose.com is not a cite
underreported.com is not a cite
freepressed.com is not a cite
Saying that it’s on a transcripts.tv but that you’re not going to pay for it is not a cite.
Saying that you found it on Lexus/Nexis, but can’t link to it, is not a cite.
I’m just going to chime in to say that I also have access to Lexis Nexis, and found the exact same transcript. If you want me to, the system also has a feature for e-mailing people specific articles, but I have my doubts on whether you’d trust that either.
I now believe that if a live link could actually be provided, you would not have the reading comprehension to understand it.
A cite is a cite is a cite. Just because you don’t have the industriousness to go to a library in Chicago and read it on a link such as Lexis/Nexis or the NYTimes, well,… :mad:
Two questions for you, milroyj (and fair warning: I will be away tonight until probably midnight, possibly later, so if you respond to me immediately I quite possibly won’t see it until tomorrow afternoon):
What is, by your definition, a cite?
What is the portion of mhendo’s post which you referenced, since evidently it is not a cite?
You disgusting little turd, look at the post right above yours.
So I guess we have to add the International Herald Tribune and the NYT to that list of ‘ilegitimate’ cites of yours.
Meanwhile, allow me to direct your attention to Komrade Scylla, The Undead, who upon his return has taken to quoting almost exclusively from such paragons of virtue and candor as Freeper Republic and the Shifties For Truth.
For the sake of consistency and integrity, I expect you’ll be all over that one like white on rice any minute now, right?
mhendo, it’s no use. I already provided him that excerpt. Thanks to the rest of you (witih one exception) for looking into this further, and perhaps we should be discussing why ABC sanitized its records instead?
John Mace, you’re looking like a coward from here. If you want to call me a liar, then do so or shut your piehole, but no more of this Republican-campaign-style “questioning”. You have provided *no * reason to believe that the quote I provided was inaccurate, especially since it does reflect Bush’s actions. Now are you going to fucking apologize for the insinuation, or are you going to clarify it, or are you going to continue the weaseling? You’ve usually been better than this, but apparently I’ve overestimated you. Now go tell your Mommy that you’ve been borrowing her computer again.
Ahem…has no one noticed the difference between what she is alleged to have said in the quote in the OP, which was taken out of context (deliberately would be my guess), and what she really said as quoted in the Diane Sawyer interview, which was that she didn’t want to bother her mind with news media speculation about the timing of when the war would occur, how many people would be killed, what day they would be killed, how the media supposed that events would unfold, etc?
She did not say that she didn’t want to bother her beautiful mind with thoughts of body bags and death, and she did not say or imply that wartime deaths were irrelevant.
She said media speculation about them was irrelevant and not worth listening to.
I don’t know where ElvisL1ves got this quote as it appears in the OP, but it is a blatant attempt to distort her words and is a perfect example of the kind of dishonest and underhanded attempts that are constantly being made to portray those on the right as uncaring, cold-hearted warmongers, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
milroyj, are you saying that you still don’t believe Barbara said that, or are you simply arguing over the definition of a cite?
It’s a link to an opinion column, not news. Where is the news cite for this quote? After all of this nonsense, there still hasn’t been ANY.
Once again, reading comprehension problem. Different player this time.
SA. You just accused milroyj of a blatant attempt to distort Barbara’s words. The quote attributed to Elvis in the OP is a fabricated one. Click on the link to the thread that milroyj provided in the OP. Then go to page 3, post #129. Elvis gave the transcript in full. Not the cut and paste job done by milroyj.
Gosh darn it, samclem. The cut and paste job was done by commondreams.org, cited by Guinistasia, not by me.
milroyj, do you have a drinking problem?
I ask in all seriousness. It seems like every weekend you get ripped and think, “Hey, I’m too drunk to drive anywhere…How 'bout I go poke those damn liberals on the SDMB?”, proceed to spew shit out of your fingertips, then slither off into soberness during the week only to pop up again the following weekend with more bullshit.
Lexis/Nexis is as much a cite as the online OED (also subscription only), and it’s as good of a cite as if I say I have a VCR copy of the TV show in question. Any sane and sober idiot knows that. You live in Chicago, for pity’s sake. Call up the Chicago Public Library, see if they have access to Lexis/Nexis, and do a search. I’d tell you to ask a college student of your acquaintance to do a search for you, but chances are you’re not smart enough to know any of those.
And for future reference: One has to pay for the best cites.
samclem, very well, I’ll take your word for it that the quote was altered in the OP. I don’t have time today to go back through and check it out. But since you seem to be saying the quote in the OP has been altered from its original form as stated by ElvisL1ves, and since most of the discussion in this thread has been as to whether or not some cite can be found where she said it rather than whether or not her words were quoted out of context, and the quote in the OP is clearly what I read and responded to, I can’t quite see how this would be a problem with my reading comprehension, can you?
You may want to check that link you implore us to look at, Mssr.samclem. (Although humorously enough, it looks to be a link to the ‘Charlie Rose’ forums. It’s a joke, right? Nobody is actually retarded enough to link to the ‘Charlie Rose’ forums as a cite I hope…)