Pelosi's "Most Ethical & Transparent" Congress

Way to go lefties. This is what towing an intellectually dishonest line gets you.
Keep it up, I am sure we will be able to make it onto another list before long.

Keep putting people like this in office, maybe we will have a despot, tyrant or dictator running everything before your lives are over :clap2:

They'll ignore it. After all, the source is not the HuffPuff. I haven't linked to a media site that explains the information to provide the left with their counter arguments. Interestingly, I cannot find one single left leaning media outlet who has covered this information. Hmmmm. I wonder why? :confused:

More proof you're an ignorant liar.

You said the above on 10/27/10. knocked Huffpo THEN claimed you couldn't find any lefty media covering this...

...well well well...what do we have here?

Corrupt Nation Rankings Released

hmmm...covered by the Huffington Post on...what's the date on that? Ah, yes, 10/26/10. The day BEFORE you claimed no left leaning media had covered this.

Now tell us, why did you lie?
 
Do you agree that the survey is a compilation of opinions, not facts?



Are they paying you to carry their water?


You seem to ALWAYS tow the Dem party bullshit line for them.

Myself and a couple others in this thread are the ONLY ones dealing in facts.

You have a problem with facts?

The facts are that the last Congress was as corrupt and incompitant as one has ever been... look at their approval rating.

Pelosi was as vague and crafty as they come....I will give her and Harry that much.
 
Are they paying you to carry their water?


You seem to ALWAYS tow the Dem party bullshit line for them.

Myself and a couple others in this thread are the ONLY ones dealing in facts.

You have a problem with facts?

The facts are that the last Congress was as corrupt and incompitant as one has ever been... look at their approval rating.

Pelosi was as vague and crafty as they come....I will give her and Harry that much.

That would be your opinion. In case you didn't notice, I did not once express a personal opinion on the transparency or corruption of the Pelosi Congress's.

I merely proved that the OP was lying, was inaccurate, was making baseless claims supported by irrelevant data.
 
Are they paying you to carry their water?


You seem to ALWAYS tow the Dem party bullshit line for them.

Myself and a couple others in this thread are the ONLY ones dealing in facts.

You have a problem with facts?

The facts are that the last Congress was as corrupt and incompitant as one has ever been... look at their approval rating.

Pelosi was as vague and crafty as they come....I will give her and Harry that much.

Usually corrupt and unethical do not go with incompetent.
 
Myself and a couple others in this thread are the ONLY ones dealing in facts.

You have a problem with facts?

The facts are that the last Congress was as corrupt and incompitant as one has ever been... look at their approval rating.

Pelosi was as vague and crafty as they come....I will give her and Harry that much.

That would be your opinion. In case you didn't notice, I did not once express a personal opinion on the transparency or corruption of the Pelosi Congress's.

I merely proved that the OP was lying, was inaccurate, was making baseless claims supported by irrelevant data.

I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet.

Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.
 
Last edited:
The facts are that the last Congress was as corrupt and incompitant as one has ever been... look at their approval rating.

Pelosi was as vague and crafty as they come....I will give her and Harry that much.

That would be your opinion. In case you didn't notice, I did not once express a personal opinion on the transparency or corruption of the Pelosi Congress's.

I merely proved that the OP was lying, was inaccurate, was making baseless claims supported by irrelevant data.

I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet.

Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.

1. You lied about liberal media not covering this report.

2. You refuse to accept the simple truth that this report is not a direct reflection on the U.S. house of representatives, with Pelosi as speaker, or Hastert, or Gingrich, or whoever.

3. Maybe you should link us to where you've seen this report used to hammer Republicans, and where, in the process, NO ONE questioned it. Sorry I can't take your word for it,

but as I pointed out awhile back, you're simply a pathological liar.
 
That would be your opinion. In case you didn't notice, I did not once express a personal opinion on the transparency or corruption of the Pelosi Congress's.

I merely proved that the OP was lying, was inaccurate, was making baseless claims supported by irrelevant data.

I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet.

Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.

1. You lied about liberal media not covering this report.

2. You refuse to accept the simple truth that this report is not a direct reflection on the U.S. house of representatives, with Pelosi as speaker, or Hastert, or Gingrich, or whoever.

3. Maybe you should link us to where you've seen this report used to hammer Republicans, and where, in the process, NO ONE questioned it. Sorry I can't take your word for it,

but as I pointed out awhile back, you're simply a pathological liar.

This report is a reflection on the previous congress. Just like it was a reflection on the congress before that.

You have attacked on every level you can think of. Firstly, you dismiss the research. That failed, so now you attack me personally. Alinski tactics. That's fine.

The facts stand on their own. Every legitimate government uses this research as a tool to measure their ethics and transparency. The country has accepted it for decades.... all of a sudden, partisan idiots dismiss it because it is an inconvenient truth.... Pelosi's Congress was less ethical than the previous one. Oops.
 
The facts are that the last Congress was as corrupt and incompitant as one has ever been... look at their approval rating.

Pelosi was as vague and crafty as they come....I will give her and Harry that much.

That would be your opinion. In case you didn't notice, I did not once express a personal opinion on the transparency or corruption of the Pelosi Congress's.

I merely proved that the OP was lying, was inaccurate, was making baseless claims supported by irrelevant data.

I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet. Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.

The above is also a lie:

The Corruption Perceptions Index has drawn increasing criticism in the decade since its launch, leading to calls for the index to be abandoned.[6][7][8] This criticism has been directed at the quality of the Index itself, and the lack of actionable insights created from a simple country ranking.[9][10] Because corruption is willfully hidden, it is impossible to measure directly; instead proxies for corruption are used. The CPI uses an eclectic mix of third-party surveys to sample public perceptions of corruption through a variety of questions, ranging from "Do you trust the government?" to "Is corruption a big problem in your country?"

The use of third-party survey data is a source of criticism. The data can vary widely in methodology and completeness from country to country. The methodology of the Index itself changes from year to year, thus making even basic better-or-worse comparisons difficult. Media outlets, meanwhile, frequently use the raw numbers as a yardstick for government performance, without clarifying what the numbers mean.[/


Corruption Perceptions Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that the above is further sourced in the footnotes.
 
I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet.

Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.

1. You lied about liberal media not covering this report.

2. You refuse to accept the simple truth that this report is not a direct reflection on the U.S. house of representatives, with Pelosi as speaker, or Hastert, or Gingrich, or whoever.

3. Maybe you should link us to where you've seen this report used to hammer Republicans, and where, in the process, NO ONE questioned it. Sorry I can't take your word for it,

but as I pointed out awhile back, you're simply a pathological liar.

This report is a reflection on the previous congress. Just like it was a reflection on the congress before that.

You have attacked on every level you can think of. Firstly, you dismiss the research. That failed, so now you attack me personally. Alinski tactics. That's fine.

The facts stand on their own. Every legitimate government uses this research as a tool to measure their ethics and transparency. The country has accepted it for decades.... all of a sudden, partisan idiots dismiss it because it is an inconvenient truth.... Pelosi's Congress was less ethical than the previous one. Oops.

Proving that you are lying is not an attack it is a statement of fact.
 
Oh, and btw, even if this were a legitimate measure of the Congress' integrity, which it isn't,

the numbers in the survey have merely fluctuated in a narrow band, within their own margin of accuracy, for 8 years.
 
That would be your opinion. In case you didn't notice, I did not once express a personal opinion on the transparency or corruption of the Pelosi Congress's.

I merely proved that the OP was lying, was inaccurate, was making baseless claims supported by irrelevant data.

I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet. Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.

The above is also a lie:

The Corruption Perceptions Index has drawn increasing criticism in the decade since its launch, leading to calls for the index to be abandoned.[6][7][8] This criticism has been directed at the quality of the Index itself, and the lack of actionable insights created from a simple country ranking.[9][10] Because corruption is willfully hidden, it is impossible to measure directly; instead proxies for corruption are used. The CPI uses an eclectic mix of third-party surveys to sample public perceptions of corruption through a variety of questions, ranging from "Do you trust the government?" to "Is corruption a big problem in your country?"

The use of third-party survey data is a source of criticism. The data can vary widely in methodology and completeness from country to country. The methodology of the Index itself changes from year to year, thus making even basic better-or-worse comparisons difficult. Media outlets, meanwhile, frequently use the raw numbers as a yardstick for government performance, without clarifying what the numbers mean.[/


Corruption Perceptions Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that the above is further sourced in the footnotes.

1. nothing you posted conflicts with what cali girl said and therefore she did not lie

2. the cited sources do not back up the wiki claims

you should really read the sources before posting anything from wiki
 
I didn't lie. The data is there. It is an inconvenient truth for the left, but the truth it is. I am absolutely not surprised that - this time around - the left find the data to be 'irrelevant'. But that hasn't stopped the same data being accepted by every legitimate agency on the planet. Your pathetic whining about data just because it proves Pelosi oversaw a less ethical congress than the previous congress is just that... pathetic whining.

I find it fascinating that the exact same source was used to hammer previous US Governments, in particular those led by Republicans, and no one questioned it then. Double standards - you can have them. I will not. The data is accepted by every legitimate government in the world. Except, apparently, the left - because it is inconvenient.

The above is also a lie:

The Corruption Perceptions Index has drawn increasing criticism in the decade since its launch, leading to calls for the index to be abandoned.[6][7][8] This criticism has been directed at the quality of the Index itself, and the lack of actionable insights created from a simple country ranking.[9][10] Because corruption is willfully hidden, it is impossible to measure directly; instead proxies for corruption are used. The CPI uses an eclectic mix of third-party surveys to sample public perceptions of corruption through a variety of questions, ranging from "Do you trust the government?" to "Is corruption a big problem in your country?"

The use of third-party survey data is a source of criticism. The data can vary widely in methodology and completeness from country to country. The methodology of the Index itself changes from year to year, thus making even basic better-or-worse comparisons difficult. Media outlets, meanwhile, frequently use the raw numbers as a yardstick for government performance, without clarifying what the numbers mean.[/


Corruption Perceptions Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that the above is further sourced in the footnotes.

1. nothing you posted conflicts with what cali girl said and therefore she did not lie

2. the cited sources do not back up the wiki claims

you should really read the sources before posting anything from wiki

That's not true so now you're lying.

And as to CG's lying in this thread...

What about her saying no liberal media outlet covered this, when I proved that Huffpost covered it the day before she made that claim? And she even mentioned Huffpost in the same post.
If that is not a lie, what do you call it?

And what about this? This is from Post #12:

Not one of the US news organizations is covering it.

Is that a lie? Let me help you decide on your answer, and maybe you'll show an ounce of integrity this time...

Corruption survey: Somalia is the worst - CNN.com

Factbox: Transparency International's global corruption index - World news - msnbc.com

World's Most Corrupt Country: Somalia - CBS News

And instead of listing more and more and more, I can just point out that this was an AP story in October, so any US news organization using AP was likely to have covered it.

So, I eagerly await your answer.
 
WOW! I would expect some heart felt rebuttal from the left on this board. Even if it was an emotional response. :lol:

So did I, to be honest. I expected at least truthmatters to wade in to explain it. I guess she hasn't received her talking points from Media Matters on this yet. Or maybe Fail&Go with a link to the HuffyPuffy to dismiss it as racist or inaccurate right wing propaganda.

Not one of the US news organizations is covering it. Not one. What a crock of shit we have for media. No doubt it's nowhere near as vital as what Sarah Palin may or may not have said today but, I for one, see this as quite a significant issue for the country.

It was covered in an Associated Press story on October 26th, which would put it in dozens of mainstream media outlets,

so once again you have lied.

Pathological liar, by definition.
 
Well, unlike the pathological liar CG, I did actually find some substantive detail to relate the perception of the U.S.'s governance:

Peter von Blomberg, the deputy director of Transparency International, said that a recent verdict by a U.S. federal court that allows companies to donate an unlimited amount of money to support parties made the group believe that "this strengthens the impression that one can buy political decisions with money."

World's Most Corrupt Country: Somalia - CBS News

Bwaaaa.......!!!!!! It turns out that the court decision that was zealously defended and championed by the RIGHT is in reality one of the factors here that reflected negatively on the perceptions of U.S. corruption.

So we'll see if CG agrees that now we have PROOF that it is conservatism, and the conservative Supreme Court, that is a major contributor to our declining integrity.

I'm guessing stunned silence, gibberish, or another lie will be CG's response.
 
Let's summarize pathological liar California Girl's lies in this thread:

1. Lied when she said this survey was facts, not opinion.
2. Lied when she said it proved the Pelosi Congress was not the most transparent.
3. Lied when she said no liberal media reported the story.
4. Lied when she said no news outlet reported the story.
5. Lied when she said the survey was accepted by every government as credible.

Did I leave any out? Is that a record for one thread?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top