Romney's Bain Lie

[Si modo]

Ok then

Hey, if a known troll stands by it, what is to question?

ROFL

Shallow, Rati, Mr. Shithead, and Derrps - the Bain Birther Brigade!

The few, the proud, the really ******* stupid....

Hey Fuckface, the Boston Globe is a reputable newspaper. They have decided NOT to retract. So what does that tell you?

How many reputable news outlets have carried the birther story and run with it, again? Is the New York Times giving credibility to Birther shit? Is the Washington Post? The Boston Globe?

No. They're not. So you're snickering is kind of stupid (no surprise) since this is a totally different issue and there's testimony of Romney ON THE RECORD in sworn statements that he wasn't involved at all. So yeah, nice try, but Bain Birther will go as far as the Tea Baggers (irony) decide to take it. The rest of the country's going to want to actually hear the answers. Other than "They're LYING! BOO HOO HOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

Suuuuure. The Globe has so much integrity that they plagiarize, yet again.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

And plagiarized.

Where's your proof of plagiary, again?

I assume you mean plagiarism.

".... but as Globe editor Martin Baron acknowledged today, it failed to credit organizations that had previously reported on the story.

“Pieces of this story were reported by other news organizations. We believe the Globe advanced the story with a more comprehensive and complete look that broke significant news and included additional documents,” Baron said in a statement to POLITICO. “However, our policy is to give credit to other news organizations for their work. In the editing and shortening process, I have learned, passages giving credit were removed. That was a mistake, and we are now adding appropriate credit back to the online version.”

....​

The PJ Tatler » Update: Boston Globe Admits It Plagiarized Romney Story from Leftist Conspiracy Mongers (Update: Docs Prove Romney Right)

Plagiary works, Semantics McGee: Plagiary | Define Plagiary at Dictionary.com

Anyway, so a Right Wing blog says that they "Plagiarized." Um, if you actually read the quote, he said the crediting got lost in the edits, and they're adding them back in. You know that mistakes happen in the news business right? And since he came right out, said what happened, and they are adding the credits back in, guess what, stupid? It's not plagiarism. But nice try at looking all smart and debunkerous.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Hey, if a known troll stands by it, what is to question?

ROFL

Shallow, Rati, Mr. Shithead, and Derrps - the Bain Birther Brigade!

The few, the proud, the really ******* stupid....

Hey Fuckface, the Boston Globe is a reputable newspaper. They have decided NOT to retract. So what does that tell you?

How many reputable news outlets have carried the birther story and run with it, again? Is the New York Times giving credibility to Birther shit? Is the Washington Post? The Boston Globe?

No. They're not. So you're snickering is kind of stupid (no surprise) since this is a totally different issue and there's testimony of Romney ON THE RECORD in sworn statements that he wasn't involved at all. So yeah, nice try, but Bain Birther will go as far as the Tea Baggers (irony) decide to take it. The rest of the country's going to want to actually hear the answers. Other than "They're LYING! BOO HOO HOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

Suuuuure. The Globe has so much integrity that they plagiarize, yet again.

It's not plagiarism, stupid It's omitted credit. That happens ALL THE TIME in news reporting. They're adding the credits back into the stories. Jesus Christ you're stupid, aren't you?

 

[Si modo]

Where's your proof of plagiary, again?

I assume you mean plagiarism.

".... but as Globe editor Martin Baron acknowledged today, it failed to credit organizations that had previously reported on the story.

“Pieces of this story were reported by other news organizations. We believe the Globe advanced the story with a more comprehensive and complete look that broke significant news and included additional documents,” Baron said in a statement to POLITICO. “However, our policy is to give credit to other news organizations for their work. In the editing and shortening process, I have learned, passages giving credit were removed. That was a mistake, and we are now adding appropriate credit back to the online version.”

....​

The PJ Tatler » Update: Boston Globe Admits It Plagiarized Romney Story from Leftist Conspiracy Mongers (Update: Docs Prove Romney Right)

Plagiary works, Semantics McGee: Plagiary | Define Plagiary at Dictionary.com

Anyway, so a Right Wing blog says that they "Plagiarized." Um, if you actually read the quote, he said the crediting got lost in the edits, and they're adding them back in. You know that mistakes happen in the news business right? And since he came right out, said what happened, and they are adding the credits back in, guess what, stupid? It's not plagiarism. But nice try at looking all smart and debunkerous.

Well, the Globe editor admitted to plagiarism.

And, this isn't the first time they've been caught.

 

[Si modo]

Hey Fuckface, the Boston Globe is a reputable newspaper. They have decided NOT to retract. So what does that tell you?

How many reputable news outlets have carried the birther story and run with it, again? Is the New York Times giving credibility to Birther shit? Is the Washington Post? The Boston Globe?

No. They're not. So you're snickering is kind of stupid (no surprise) since this is a totally different issue and there's testimony of Romney ON THE RECORD in sworn statements that he wasn't involved at all. So yeah, nice try, but Bain Birther will go as far as the Tea Baggers (irony) decide to take it. The rest of the country's going to want to actually hear the answers. Other than "They're LYING! BOO HOO HOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

Suuuuure. The Globe has so much integrity that they plagiarize, yet again.

It's not plagiarism, stupid It's omitted credit. That happens ALL THE TIME in news reporting. They're adding the credits back into the stories. Jesus Christ you're stupid, aren't you?

"It's not plagiarism, stupid [sic] It's omitted credit"

OMG. That's a classic right there.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

I assume you mean plagiarism.

".... but as Globe editor Martin Baron acknowledged today, it failed to credit organizations that had previously reported on the story.

“Pieces of this story were reported by other news organizations. We believe the Globe advanced the story with a more comprehensive and complete look that broke significant news and included additional documents,” Baron said in a statement to POLITICO. “However, our policy is to give credit to other news organizations for their work. In the editing and shortening process, I have learned, passages giving credit were removed. That was a mistake, and we are now adding appropriate credit back to the online version.”

....​

The PJ Tatler » Update: Boston Globe Admits It Plagiarized Romney Story from Leftist Conspiracy Mongers (Update: Docs Prove Romney Right)

Plagiary works, Semantics McGee: Plagiary | Define Plagiary at Dictionary.com

Anyway, so a Right Wing blog says that they "Plagiarized." Um, if you actually read the quote, he said the crediting got lost in the edits, and they're adding them back in. You know that mistakes happen in the news business right? And since he came right out, said what happened, and they are adding the credits back in, guess what, stupid? It's not plagiarism. But nice try at looking all smart and debunkerous.

Well, the Globe editor admitted to plagiarism.

And, this isn't the first time they've been caught.

No he didn't. He admitted that in the editing process the credits were MISTAKENLY omitted. You can spin that all you want, but I'm sure if you call up the Globe and ask them they have time-stamped drafts of the story in their system. But you won't do that because you're a chicken-shit and you're trying to discredit the story because of a simple editing mistake.

If it was really plagiarism, do you think he'd come out the next day and cop to it and then say he was going to fix the issue? This is a non-starter and you know it.

 

[Si modo]

Plagiary works, Semantics McGee: Plagiary | Define Plagiary at Dictionary.com

Anyway, so a Right Wing blog says that they "Plagiarized." Um, if you actually read the quote, he said the crediting got lost in the edits, and they're adding them back in. You know that mistakes happen in the news business right? And since he came right out, said what happened, and they are adding the credits back in, guess what, stupid? It's not plagiarism. But nice try at looking all smart and debunkerous.

Well, the Globe editor admitted to plagiarism.

And, this isn't the first time they've been caught.

No he didn't. He admitted that in the editing process the credits were MISTAKENLY omitted. You can spin that all you want, but I'm sure if you call up the Globe and ask them they have time-stamped drafts of the story in their system. But you won't do that because you're a chicken-shit and you're trying to discredit the story because of a simple editing mistake.

If it was really plagiarism, do you think he'd come out the next day and cop to it and then say he was going to fix the issue? This is a non-starter and you know it.

Yes, yes, and omitting sources is not plagiarism. That just cracks me up!

(But, good for them for fixing their plagiarism.)

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Suuuuure. The Globe has so much integrity that they plagiarize, yet again.

It's not plagiarism, stupid It's omitted credit. That happens ALL THE TIME in news reporting. They're adding the credits back into the stories. Jesus Christ you're stupid, aren't you?

"It's not plagiarism, stupid [sic] It's omitted credit"

OMG. That's a classic right there.

You have to prove intent, Dummy. It's unintentional and he easily explained what happened. And what I notice you're NOT doing is disputing the actual facts in the report/story. You're doing what you wingnuts do best, which is latching onto something minute and ultimately inconsequential while ignoring the facts.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Well, the Globe editor admitted to plagiarism.

And, this isn't the first time they've been caught.

No he didn't. He admitted that in the editing process the credits were MISTAKENLY omitted. You can spin that all you want, but I'm sure if you call up the Globe and ask them they have time-stamped drafts of the story in their system. But you won't do that because you're a chicken-shit and you're trying to discredit the story because of a simple editing mistake.

If it was really plagiarism, do you think he'd come out the next day and cop to it and then say he was going to fix the issue? This is a non-starter and you know it.

Yes, yes, and omitting sources is not plagiarism. That just cracks me up!

(But, good for them for fixing their plagiarism.)

So their mistaken and very temporary plagiarism makes the facts reported in the corrected and attributed story how, then?

 

[BDBoop]

Oh dear. You brought up Obama's record. Now, now, don't deflect like that in a campaign. We are in the middle of a perfectly imaginary drool fest about what didn't happen.

How dare you **** with the droolers like that.

He is.

You guys just keep shouting "Fail, fail, fail".

In your circle you've unmoored the meanings of the words fail and success.

Bush was a "successful" President in Conservatopia. And Obama wasn't..

Well..

No thanks.

bush sucked

defying the odds, obama sucks worse.

And on what do you base that conclusion.

 

[Si modo]

No he didn't. He admitted that in the editing process the credits were MISTAKENLY omitted. You can spin that all you want, but I'm sure if you call up the Globe and ask them they have time-stamped drafts of the story in their system. But you won't do that because you're a chicken-shit and you're trying to discredit the story because of a simple editing mistake.

If it was really plagiarism, do you think he'd come out the next day and cop to it and then say he was going to fix the issue? This is a non-starter and you know it.

Yes, yes, and omitting sources is not plagiarism. That just cracks me up!

(But, good for them for fixing their plagiarism.)

So their mistaken and very temporary plagiarism makes the facts reported in the corrected and attributed story how, then?

I was commenting on your infatuation with what you think is integrity in journalism.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Yes, yes, and omitting sources is not plagiarism. That just cracks me up!

(But, good for them for fixing their plagiarism.)

So their mistaken and very temporary plagiarism makes the facts reported in the corrected and attributed story how, then?

I was commenting on your infatuation with what you think is integrity in journalism.

They do have integrity. They acknowledged the mistake and corrected it.

Now you show some integrity and focus on the facts of the now correctly attributed story. What do you dispute about them, exactly, now that we've cleared up your obfuscation.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Boston Globe lying to protect Obama. Wow! Who thought that would ever happen?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Romney stole capital, pensions, and jobs from American companies.

Romney is a liar and a thief.

Then the money used to "steal capital, pensions, and jobs from American companies" was given to the DNC via "donations."


What's your view on that?

Some heads are truly going to explode.

I wish, I'm certain Chris will just ignore that post and press forward with his "worship at all costs" view of Obama.

Obama could kick him in the nuts, and he'd say thanks for karate lesson.

 

[Uncensored2008]

This, my friend, is the important passage, from the update to the story:

Bain Birther desperation is desperate.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"It's not plagiarism, stupid [sic] It's omitted credit"

OMG. That's a classic right there.

Bain Birther Troll Conservaderrps is nothing, if not entertaining.

 

[Si modo]

So their mistaken and very temporary plagiarism makes the facts reported in the corrected and attributed story how, then?

I was commenting on your infatuation with what you think is integrity in journalism.

They do have integrity. They acknowledged the mistake and corrected it.

Now you show some integrity and focus on the facts of the now correctly attributed story. What do you dispute about them, exactly, now that we've cleared up your obfuscation.

Oh, well, there was little obfuscation on my part when I was laughing at what you were saying about plagiarism.

I can bring up other examples of their plagiarism if you would like?

But, to the point, information and simple explanations for the retarded among the population have since been printed elsewhere, and in more reputable rags, that clearly explain what happened.

And, all that has been posted. Which makes me question the general health of the brains of some here.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And on what do you base that conclusion.

Are you a Bain Birther?

I'm compiling a list.

 

[bobgnote]

What's desperate is all the deflection, from how white Obamney won't cop to his tax returns, which are due, anytime.

Hey, if white Obamney is so ******* pristine, he can cough up returns, like all the candidates AND his daddy George, did.

Speaking of GW, how about how he wanted to invade Afghanistan, before 9/11 (Condi testimony-will she get the Veep nod?), and THEN GW orders the CIA and FBI to stand down, on sharing information, about the attacks, which are about to happen, and THEN GW and Cheney engaged a lying Iraqi informant (Op.Curveball), so GW and his assholes lied to Congress, to get TWO WARS AND TORTURE, going, even though the CIA told GW how Saddam had no WMDs or new yellowcake, since the Israelis bombed him, in 1981.

GW ate a Kuala Lampur information, and Amnesty International won't let this be. Does anyone think they can deflect for white Obamney or George Zimmerman, under the circumstances?

Hey. GZ didn't cop to his finances. Now he's out, on a million-$ bond.

White Obamney is short a few tax returns, and he has to **** off, for wanting an apology, when he is about to eat a media shit-storm, which no amount of deflection will reduce or abate.

It seems LYING and DEFLECTION are going around, together. Should we allow them to marry?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

I was commenting on your infatuation with what you think is integrity in journalism.

They do have integrity. They acknowledged the mistake and corrected it.

Now you show some integrity and focus on the facts of the now correctly attributed story. What do you dispute about them, exactly, now that we've cleared up your obfuscation.

Oh, well, there was little obfuscation on my part when I was laughing at what you were saying about plagiarism.

I can bring up other examples of their plagiarism if you would like?

But, to the point, information and simple explanations for the retarded among the population have since been printed elsewhere, and in more reputable rags, that clearly explain what happened.

And, all that has been posted. Which makes me question the general health of the brains of some here.

Again, you can argue the semantics of plagiarism all you want, but since the story was corrected, your assertions of it, and the Right Wing hack blog you linked to, are now false. So let's just move past that.

And again, since the Globe is not printing a retraction, and since other outlets are carrying this story, it clearly has legs. And Romney's multiple and conflicting explanations are still in play, are they not? I get that you have a dog in the race; so do I. What I'm looking for from you is intellectual honesty.

I gave you your temporary plagiarism win (again, now corrected), but you can't even admit that there are multiple and conflicting versions of Mitt's story, from Mitt himself? This is why you're a hack. This is why you and Uncensored are full of shit, when trying to compare this to anything Birther related. This is a legit story with legit angles. There's no one on TV selling transcripts of Bain's meetings.

Man, you Conservatives have been lied to about what journalism is so long, you have no idea when you see a legit story anymore, do you?