Is this true??

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I point out obvious hypocrisy, Paul. Like when you accuse me of hate, you chastis eme for not being respectfulk to Hilary, yet yo uare free to us eth eterm "teabagger". I guessed i missed the announcement that only you get to hurl insults, my bad.I have done that prob. 4 -5 times in total and it is to get under your skin. Has there ever been anyone else in recent times here who hurls insults like you? POS and FCOTUS! What kind of adult talks like that bc they don't like someone's politics?

"Westmoreland would not have been qualified to offer him a "scholarship"

He would have been able to say "hey if you apply, you'll get a full scholarship". Anyone could have toild Carson that, and they would have been rightt.You're right. But Westmorland could not and would not have offered him a scholarship. Saying you are qualified (and I said he prob. was qualified earlier) and would prob. get in is far different than offering him a scholarship. In fact, he was not even at the event Carson claimed he was at.

I don't like Carson. But my opinion is based on his stated policy agenda, not dirt that yellow journalists are slinging.

How is questioning his statements yellow journalism? Even if he proves everything he has stated the facts clearly don't line up with his statements. Should the press just blindly believe everything a candidate states? It has already been shown that his statements that he had no involvement with the nutritional company where incorrect and his statement that he spoke with General Westmoreland at the event where incorrect.

We're not talking about claiming he was a Muslim and born in a foreign country here w/o ANY facts at all.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

How is questioning his statements yellow journalism? Even if he proves everything he has stated the facts clearly don't line up with his statements. Should the press just blindly believe everything a candidate states? It has already been shown that his statements that he had no involvement with the nutritional company where incorrect and his statement that he spoke with General Westmoreland at the event where incorrect.

We're not talking about claiming he was a Muslim and born in a foreign country here w/o ANY facts at all.

"I have done that prob. 4 -5 times in total "

Oh, I see. So what's the maximum number of times you can use hate speech, but still congratulate yourself on not being a hater?

"it is to get under your skin"

You are failing to get under my skin, believe me. That I point out your glaring hypocrisy, doesn't mean you are under my skin. I point out the obvious hypocrisy, then forget about it.

"Has there ever been anyone else in recent times here who hurls insults like you?"

Sure. I would argue you do. Clearly Obama does ("Republicans gotta stop just hatin all the time"). I only do it, to people who have clearly demonstrated hatred for my side. I don't do fake nice. If someone uses sufficiently insulting, and clearly dishonest, language to describe my side, they have forfeited the right to expect any respect from me. Hilary claims that my side framed her husband to make it look like he was cheating. She claims that my side is waging war on women (funny, since Ted Kennedy has the only confirmed kill in that war). If I describe her as a c*nt, it's because in my opinion, she deserves no better that that from me. If you disagree, good for you. But if you use the term teabagger, you can't claim to a holier-than-thou attitude, because we are exactly alike in this regard. When you feel sufficiently provoked, you use hateful, insulting language. Just like me. Try making that wrong.


"But the term "full scholarship" is an inaccurate description"

Funny. Carson has posted a West Point recruiting poster from that time, aimed at black students, that promises "scholarships". The word "scholarship" is on the poster. And if Carson relies on West Point's poster, he is a liar. Makes perfect sense!

"But Westmorland could not and would not have offered him a scholarship"

How do you know what he "would" do? How could you possibly know that?

"questioning his statements yellow journalism?"

POLITICO claimed that the Carson camp admitted to fabricating the scholarship thing. Carson's camp never made that statement to POLITICO, and POLITICO admitted THEY were lyong when they removed that claim from the headline, but of course offered no apology.

What is the proof that he "lied" about the scholarship or his violent tendencies? No proof, just suggestion.

How about instead of questioning his violent tendencies, we ask if someone with those tendencies is fit to be POTUS? You don't have to invent lies to discredit the man, there's enough truth to do that. But that's not enough for minorities or women who are a threat to liberals.