Why Do Liberals See Women As Stupid?

[HankD]

>>"No one ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American public," H. L. Mencken.

>uhhhh, Japan?

The exception that makes the rule . . .twice! <G>

Twice?

King George III?




HankD

 

[Skandelon]

Twice?

King George III?



HankD

I think we could add to that list Gerald Ford, Bob Dole and John McCain. :laugh:

 

[Bro. Curtis]

That's fine. What info would you like?

Still waiting.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Still waiting.

http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-di...palin-a-summary-before-the-next-round/194027/

 

[Bro. Curtis]

That is a two-year old opinion piece, that bases it's "facts" on other pieces. None of these stories panned out. It doesn't show anything. It does show that when it comes to backing up your claims, you would rather just hand out reading assignments.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

See, what you did was try and reduce my statement, to opinion, by comparing it to that piece. It is not my opinion Obama lied, it is inarguable fact. Truth. It happened. He lied. Yup. Only a liar would say he didn't lie.

Now, with Palin, you have not posted up a single thing she lied about. As in other threads, we are just to take your word for it. I'm not going to address your link. I'm asking YOU to provide a lie, told by Palin, that is not a link to an opinion piece.

 

[dwmoeller1]

That is a two-year old opinion piece, that bases it's "facts" on other pieces. None of these stories panned out. It doesn't show anything. It does show that when it comes to backing up your claims, you would rather just hand out reading assignments.

It was not an opinion piece. It was a summary of research and fact checking he had done. As he points out he stuck with the lies that are demonstrably false.

As to reading assignments I dont know how else I could practically approach it other than to refer you to people who have looked at the primary documents and gathered the facts. Any argument I might make you could ask sources for my claims. So rather than be a middle man I am just sending you directly to sources.

As to these things being stories that didn't pan out, please cite one source that demonstrates this on any of his points. Since anything you claim I am going to ask for a source, please feel free to just point me to your sources. Since finding the truth requires reading, I don't mind.

 

[dwmoeller1]

In the meantime maybe focusing on the specifics of one particular lie at a time will help. Since you don't like reading assignments I will just summarize and leave it to you to disprove my assertions.

In the 2006 campaign, Palin claims to have been against the "Bridge to nowhere". Specifically she claims that she told Congress "thanks, but no thanks" to the funding and that they kept it. In actual fact:
- Local newspapers show that in 2006 Palin supported the bridge.
- that she took the funding she claimed to have rejected and then eventually redirected the funding to other things
- a spokesman on her staff admits that it was Congress which eventually put an end to the bridge project. And there is no evidence that Palin made any real efforts in that regards.

IOW, the facts are demonstratably contrary to her claims.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Actually, it was an opinion piece, and an old one.

Here is Palin, in her own words, explaining this episode. And I do appreciate you being specific.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T25ctQMsJc

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Here is an opinion piece, that asks great questions about this, as well.

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/node/66