Christmas Tree "Bullshit"

[QueEx]

<font size="4"><center>

The Obamas are NOT getting rid of the
traditional "Christmas" Tree

</font size></center>

<IFRAME SRC="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/holiday-tree-hooey/" WIDTH=780 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/holiday-tree-hooey/">link</A>

</IFRAME>

 

[thoughtone]

The other day I watched the classic movie, 'The Great Escape.' In that film, a Nazi officer stated that they were not amused by the constants efforts invested in retrieving Allie POWs after their escape attempts. The SS officer said "...this was taking considerable efforts away from fighting the war!" Such accusations as the “Holiday Tree” as well as the multitude of other ridiculous statements that are un-sourced and are designed to sully the reputation of the Obama’s are not worth the energies to debunk them. As was illustrated so accurately over the last few days by the so called "Bubble Boy" incident, the talk, news industry is more interested in sensationalisms rather than asking questions and verifying. The National Enquire-ization of the so called cable news business is reaching the tipping point of annoyance.

 

[QueEx]

The other day I watched the classic movie, 'The Great Escape.' In that film, a Nazi officer stated that they were not amused by the constants efforts invested in retrieving Allie POWs after their escape attempts. The SS officer said "...this was taking considerable efforts away from fighting the war!" Such accusations as the “Holiday Tree” as well as the multitude of other ridiculous statements that are un-sourced and are designed to sully the reputation of the Obama’s are <u>not worth the energies to debunk them</u>. As was illustrated so accurately over the last few days by the so called "Bubble Boy" incident, the talk, news industry is more interested in sensationalisms rather than asking questions and verifying. The National Enquire-ization of the so called cable news business is reaching the tipping point of annoyance.

If, however, they are not debunked; will they not go down as "tacit admissions" of truth ? ? ?

QueEx

 

[thoughtone]

If, however, they are not debunked; will they not go down as "tacit admissions" of truth ? ? ?

QueEx

So, in other words, guilty until proven innocent? As I implied in my above statement, if the so called news media were doing their jobs, these claims would never see mass consumption.

 

[QueEx]

So, in other words, guilty until proven innocent? As I implied in my above statement, if the so called news media were doing their jobs, these claims would never see mass consumption.

Well, what I meant was: if rumor and falsehood are not debunked, they may be accepted as true. If someone says, "you killed her" -- your silence in the face of such a bold allegation could be said to be an admission of your guilt -- because otherwise, surely you would have denied it.

With respect to the news media: I'm really not certain it has a job, so to speak. I don't know that it has the job to ferret out the truth or that it is charged with informing the masses. It says that it does, but what makes that so ??? Of course, I think it has a duty not lie or mislead when it does speak, but what gives it the duty to speak, in the first place ???

QueEx

 

[QueEx]

P.S.

I think the job of informing the masses, is the job of the masses. I think the members of "the masses" have a duty to inform and make themselves more educated and learned. I also think, however, that the masses, in large part, have long ago breached that duty, to itself.

QueEx

 

[thoughtone]

Well, what I meant was: if rumor and falsehood are not debunked, they may be accepted as true. If someone says, "you killed her" -- your silence in the face of such a bold allegation could be said to be an admission of your guilt -- because otherwise, surely you would have denied it.

With respect to the news media: I'm really not certain it has a job, so to speak. I don't know that it has the job to ferret out the truth or that it is charged with informing the masses. It says that it does, but what makes that so ??? Of course, I think it has a duty not lie or mislead when it does speak, but what gives it the duty to speak, in the first place ???

QueEx

Search McCarthyism, guilt by innuendo. Or in terms that may be easier for you to understand: playing the high school game of accusing someone of being gay in order to destroy their reputation.

The bottom line is that rather than report real news and investigate actual corruption they rather appeal to the lowest common denominator.

As far as the media's job, the "Third Estate" use to seek the truth by informing. Now, like everything else, it is just a promotional arm of the capitalist money making system. Again you can blame that on Reagan.

 

[QueEx]

 

[mailboxpimp]

who gives a fuck about a tree....& who really gives a fuck about the obamas.... fuck them house ------ ......& everything they stand for.... everyday i wake up i hope his administration takes a huge ass L........ out side of wanting to put some dick in his wife....... in the oval office...... live on c-span..... i givez a fuck about the ------ ..... he's not on "our" team... & you dumb ass ------- want to support this fucking faggot..... when ya'll gonna wake up.... he might as well be a cac...

i support anyone that dont support this fuck!

 

[Cruise]

Looks like we got a refugee from the main board.

who gives a fuck about a tree

 

[QueEx]

who gives a fuck about a tree

Don't know, but I do know who gives a fuck about the Rules of this Board.

Please read them.

QueEx