| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
25 Jul 2007 12:55:19 PM |
| Object: |
CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
--
get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican.
.
|
|
| User: "Blackwater" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
25 Jul 2007 04:17:16 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
26 Jul 2007 10:19:38 AM |
|
|
Blackwater wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
Obviously someone is unaware of the protections afforded to political
speech and the high bar that needs to met for slander against a public
figure. Or else there's political censorship going on.
--Jeff
--
"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already
earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake,
since for him, the spinal cord would fully suffice."
--Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
26 Jul 2007 10:29:12 AM |
|
|
In article <13ahesi5ca9pnaf@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeffrey Turner <jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Blackwater wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
Obviously someone is unaware of the protections afforded to political
speech and the high bar that needs to met for slander against a public
figure. Or else there's political censorship going on.
there is no "Or else" involved. cnn censored the most popular public
question. that is the fact of the matter.
--
get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
25 Jul 2007 04:21:35 PM |
|
|
In article <46a7bd33.4959393@news.east.earthlink.net>,
(Blackwater) wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
that's the cover-up cnn is using now, i guess.
the facts are, they announced they'd cover the questions most often
asked. that was a lie.
--
get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Blackwater" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
25 Jul 2007 04:56:25 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:21:35 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <46a7bd33.4959393@news.east.earthlink.net>,
bw@barrk.net (Blackwater) wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
that's the cover-up cnn is using now, i guess.
It's not actually a "cover-up" ... it's PROPER PROCEDURE
and the right thing to do. The news people forwarded all
kinds of slanders against the Duke lacrosse players - and
was shamed because of it. Of course THEY didn't have the
clout of GW Bush ... so the media got away with it.
the facts are, they announced they'd cover the questions most often
asked. that was a lie.
A matter of interpretation - or so the lawyers would say.
Now IF Bush or Cheney ARE convicted of criminally enhancing
the facts, THEN it's OK to talk about their crimes as if
they were fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
25 Jul 2007 05:21:44 PM |
|
|
"Blackwater" <bw@barrk.net> wrote in message
news:46a7c61b.7239344@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:21:35 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <46a7bd33.4959393@news.east.earthlink.net>,
bw@barrk.net (Blackwater) wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
that's the cover-up cnn is using now, i guess.
It's not actually a "cover-up" ... it's PROPER PROCEDURE
and the right thing to do. The news people forwarded all
kinds of slanders against the Duke lacrosse players - and
was shamed because of it. Of course THEY didn't have the
clout of GW Bush ... so the media got away with it.
the facts are, they announced they'd cover the questions most often
asked. that was a lie.
A matter of interpretation - or so the lawyers would say.
Now IF Bush or Cheney ARE convicted of criminally enhancing
the facts, THEN it's OK to talk about their crimes as if
they were fact.
Plus, this was a debate so people can hear the issues by the democrat
presidential candidates.
This wasn't a "*****-session" for liberals to take advantage of.
CNN was keeping to to the points and the debate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
25 Jul 2007 05:53:57 PM |
|
|
In article <IIydnS_IMb9kUTrbnZ2dnUVZ_qelnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <NoNeedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
[...]
CNN was keeping to to the points and the debate.
your ignornace is showing again, coward bobby, unless you're just
blatantly lying again.
cnn committed to ask the questions most asked by viewers. the
question most asked was the impeachment issue, and cnn censored that.
had you read the story before you responded to it, you would have
known that.
--
get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Censors #1 Youtube |
25 Jul 2007 05:52:03 PM |
|
|
In article <46a7c61b.7239344@news.east.earthlink.net>,
(Blackwater) wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:21:35 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <46a7bd33.4959393@news.east.earthlink.net>,
(Blackwater) wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:55:19 -0400, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
CNN Censors #1 Youtube
Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 23, 2007 - 9:08pm.
CNN is congratulating itself profusely for its YouTube debate, and
they showed a lot of excellent questions. But they refused to show
the #1 video as voted on by visitors to CommunityCounts. The
hands-down winning question was on impeachment.
http://www.democrats.com/cnn-censors-impeachment-youtube
It's clear why they didn't use it - she made a number
of unsubstantiated/debatable assertions about the
presidents "crimes" that amount to slander. You don't
get to say such things until AFTER a conviction. CNN
was covering its legal backside.
that's the cover-up cnn is using now, i guess.
It's not actually a "cover-up" ...
that's the cnn company line now to cover up what they did.
it's PROPER PROCEDURE
lying is "PROPER" for cnn? i thought that was just fox where lying
was ok?
the facts are, they announced they'd cover the questions most often
asked. that was a lie.
A matter of interpretation
not at all.
- or so the lawyers would say.
cnn's lawyers do say it. but of course it's a lie which has bene
trivially exposed.
--
get real. like jesus would ever own a gun or vote republican.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
