FauxNews airs old footage to fool viewers

Crashk said:
your examples are so weak compared to the dozens of times Faux intentionally lied about Democrats. I found it laughable that you had to dig so deep to find these 2 weak examples. Pfffft
Click to expand...
Weak? haha
You asked for one, I gave you two.....you want more? Google is your friend.:) There are dozens of bloopers on Fox, I ain't look at all of them to satisfy you.
 
Lowaicue said:
Ta muchly for the offer. We have BBC World and a couple of others on our B'band TV thingy. HuffPo is OK but it seems to be morphing into just another news source since dear AOL took over. It is the only US source of news I have on my pod. I used to have NYT because many years ago it impressed me, but no longer. Same can be said for the Washington Post. Quite a boring read. Not many pictures to colour in!! :)
Click to expand...
I'm not offering anything, I'm pointing out that the getnews feature of this board is coolski and I can add RSS feeds if people offer.

:D

Anyway, just saying, the feature is one of the ones I am most proud of working out.
 
Crashk said:
Here's one lie that will be easy for you to understand...
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...y-says-no-one-fox-raised-issue-jail-time-not/
Click to expand...

Let's take your first one. It comes down to a comparison of dates:

Neither the initial health care bill introduced in the House (H.R. 3200) nor the one that passed the House in November 2009 (H.R. 3962) had specific language ruling out prison for those who failed to pay penalties for not having health insurance. However, many experts considered the likelihood of prison time remote. On Sept. 29, 2009 -- at a time when H.R. 3200 was the only detailed health care bill under consideration in either chamber -- PolitiFact concluded that "the notion that one could go to prison for not buying insurance is certainly attention-grabbing, but based on past patterns of prosecution, the likelihood of it happening is extremely small."

Even that slight chance disappeared after the Senate got involved. The outline of a bill introduced on Sept. 16, 2009, by Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., didn't specify how penalties would be enforced but by the time the measure had made it into official language and been passed by his committee on Oct. 19, 2009...
Click to expand...

Compare this with the next paragraph:

• Paul Gigot, host of the Journal Editorial Reports, Oct. 3, 2009

"Democrats want to require you to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. But they don't want you to call it a tax. Under the Baucus bill, the so-called individual mandate would require everyone to buy health insurance or pay as much as a $1,900 fee. If you don't pay up, the IRS could punish you with a $25,000 fine or a year in jail."
Click to expand...

When Gigot said this, it was true. Yet your article claims it as a lie, or at best, a mistake.

Was it true or not when Gigot said it on October 3, 2009?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top