What would REALLY make it easier is if people would stop fucking quoting him!
Do you have something to share about Michelle, Malia, or Sasha? Come on, SA, TMZ is waiting, dog! Don’t be a beta… give 'em the dirt and YOU get PAID. Bring that shit, yo!
I would call that “Sarahndipitous” on her part. It’s my newly coined word.
I for one am grateful that SA seems to have found himself with some extra time on his hands. We’ve been sorely in need of more thoughtful and well-informed discussion topics here.
Fixed that for ya. If you’re gonna be street, ya gots to go all the way.
Uh, the topic isn’t mine. I merely pointed out that it isn’t impossible to have a situation where a politician’s family gets only or mostly positive coverage.
Of course that politician is usually a Democrat, but that ain’t my doin’.
What Republican family has gotten negative coverage?
BTW, although the msm left Chelsea alone for the most part, I can’t think of anything comparable to what SNL did when they Had Chris Farley play her at the inauguration. Funny as hell, but cruel.
And yet that skit drew nowhere near the scorn and condemnation that Limbaugh did for “accidentally” putting up a picure of her for two seconds when it was ostensibly supposed to be the new White House dog.
Yeah, well, then the wrong fat guy died. So things evened out.
Obama’s family are bright and well-adjusted, so his family tends to get positive coverage. Palin is a media clown with a trailer trash family, so her family tends to get negative media coverage. If she and her family could pull their act together, the coverage would be more positive, but I can’t see her and her family doing this, for they are what they are, and it is far too late for them to turn themselves around.
Yeah, I dropped the ball. I’ve trained myself to do that with certain other posters, but TBQH I just really wanted those lottery numbers. 
But…they ARE a bunch of trailer parkers.
You mean, Dio asks a question, someone answers it, and he picks apart the answer? Color me shocked.
But, to be honest, in a sort of debate like we have here, it’s pretty standard. It’s not like it’s people giving their opinions on why something bothers them…
Bricker’s mistake was engaging Dio within the confines he set up. They aren’t reasonable. Let’s look at this a different way.
The one thing you can find a lot of is organizations reporting that the rumor was false. Now, there are two obvious reasons to report that something is untrue: people somehow believe it is, or you want imply it is true, without getting in trouble. For example, I could say “Dio is absolutely NOT a murderer.” By doing so, I’ve just implied that there are people who believe otherwise.
But let’s give the benefit of the doubt, and assume they were dispelling actual rumors. How could these rumors have spread so fast? Not even viral movies spread that fast. Bricker’s contention is that some organizations reported the blog post you keep mentioning. Again, no news organization worth its salt is going to report it as true.* But, in doing so, they spread the rumor. And, apparently, some took this as true.
In fact, it’s actually a well known hedging technique (pitted on this very message board) to say that so-and-so said X. It gets the message out there, without giving you culpability. To go along with my example, I can pull out “‘Dio is a murderer’ says respected blogger X.” Then I can come along later and say, “Dio is NOT a murderer. Respected blogger X was wrong. Here’s proof.”
And, yet, I’m still getting the rumor out. I’m still guilty of getting people to at least consider that Dio might be a murderer. I’m still attacking him. I’m just being “sneaky.” I put it in quotes because anyone with a high school diploma should be able to figure it out.
Bricker has provided a couple cites. They aren’t as conclusive as Dio wants. But they do hint at the scenario above. Of course Dio doesn’t have to refute it if he doesn’t want to. Or he can sit here and pick apart my scenarios. I’d really like that, if he has citations.
*Heck, even [del]Faux[/del]Fox News uses this. I remember Jon Stewart calling them on it. They would say something bad during their “opinion programming”, and then, the next day, report about the rumors going around.
Bricker only provided one cite, and that was a conservative blogger asking Palin to put an end to it. He did not provide an example of Reuters doing anything, he just claimed they did without a cite.
I repeat? The media did not pick up or runwith the fake pregnacy story execpt to debunk it and express indignation over it. Any claim that the news media has ever attacked Palin’s family is fraudulent and unsupportable.
Or if a lawyer in her family (snerk!) defended a terrist.
You mean, a conservative repeats a conservative meme, is called upon to provide actual evidence for it, but has a hard time finding such? And yet other conservatives chime in to support the unsupported meme? Color me completely unsurprised.
Okay, here you go.
Regards,
Shodan
In other words, you’ve got nothing.
No, just that deliberate ignorance is invincible.
Regards,
Shodan