Paul, here is why you are not someone to be taken seriously.
You mean because I've proven you wrong?
In my first post, I stated that the NYT admitted the charges against Menendez were serious
No you didn't. Your quote was "By the way, here is a piece in the NYT suggesting that at least part of the Menendez investigation is nothing more than a political smear...". You keep saying that I somehow "altered" the article to make it seem like the NYT wasn't admitting to the seriousness of the charges.
That is exactly what you did. You took out the part where the paper said that Menendez and his staff thought it was a smear. What you are accusing me of, simply didn't happen. It. Did. Not. Happen. Am I going too fast for you?
Wrong, you did. And am I going too fast for you - (in my best Jim in Ct voice) YOU ALTERED THE SENTENCE BY LEAVING OUT THE FIRST PART.
When I make generalized statements (and I use hyperbole a lot) you think you can refute them by pointing to one exception. Yet you allow yourself the liberty to say things like "Rubio leeching water like a dehumidifier". If you can use hyperbole, why can't anyone else
So you think that my statement laughing at Rubio's sweating is the same as your statement which started the whole post about the amount of press on the 2 issues
?
The Rubio water thing was all over NBC, MSNBC, and CNN. I haven't seen much coverage of the Menendez story on those outlets, and I follow these things pretty closely. Can I mathematically prove that those stations gave more coverage to Rubio than Menendez? No, I cannot, I don't have the resources to do that. Nor can I prove mathematically that the sun will rise tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure it's the case.
Threaded Mode